On April 6, 2007 12:30 PM Gregory Vanuxem wrote:
>
> At the boot level I want to know if a given type is valid.
> By type I mean a category or a domain (parametrised if
> they must be). So for example I want to know that
> 'Matrix(Character)' and 'Fields' are invalid but not
> Matrix(Ring) and Mat
On April 6, 2007 8:04 AM Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> ...
> Bill Page wrote [about using LEXGREATERP as an ordering]:
> >
> > Yes. Why do you say that this would not be consistent with
> > domain equality?
> >
>
> Domain elements may be mathematically equal but have different
> representations. AFAIC
Dear Bill, Waldek, *
Waldek Hebisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would say that sorting elements of Set is a design bug.
I disagree - but in fact, I believe that the statement above is due to
miscommunication:
"Set" uses the order of the underlying domain *if* the latter is an OrderedSet,
i.
Hello,
At the boot level I want to know if a given type is valid. By type I
mean a category or a domain (parametrised if they must be). So for
example I want to know that 'Matrix(Character)' and 'Fields' are invalid
but not Matrix(Ring) and Matrix(Integer). There are several functions in
the inte
> On April 5, 2007 1:25 PM Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> > ...
> > > >
> > > > You need an order which is consistent with equality.
> > >
> > > I agree.
> > >
> > > > Since equality is domain-specific you need also domian-
> > > > specific order. I agree that we do not have one handy.
> > >
> > > I
