My updated patch is here:
https://github.com/oldk1331/fricas/commit/0bf5c58d3cf72fd6429313c62e5c28bf1312451f.patch
Following similar logic, "nodes" and "leaves" should give error when
argument is empty; but "leaf?", "child?", "node?" should not give error,
they should return true when the relatio
Waldek,
On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 12:02 PM you wrote:
>
> One update to what I wrote before. In
>
> J. P. Bell, A. Heinle, and V. Levandovskyy,
> On Noncommutative Finite Factorization Domains,
> Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 369 (2017), 2675-2695
>
> there is proof of finite number of factorizations.
>
oldk1331 wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:07 PM Waldek Hebisch
> wrote:
> >
> > That is the point: normal case is that we check before using
> > 'children' and error in 'childern' is to catch bugs
> > (missing check). That is why I ask if you have use
> > case when we want call without chec
On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 10:07 PM Waldek Hebisch
wrote:
>
> That is the point: normal case is that we check before using
> 'children' and error in 'childern' is to catch bugs
> (missing check). That is why I ask if you have use
> case when we want call without check and empty return is
> OK.
That
Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
>
> What I find definitely bad is to give the burden of checking to both the
> function and the caller, by letting the specification be unclear about
> special cases.
>
> http://fricas.github.io/api/GcdDomain.html#l-gcd-domain-gcd
>
> gcd(x, y) returns the greatest common
oldk1331 wrote:
> I have a few reasons:
>
> 1. I prefer to have fewer "error" in library, it's hard
> to handle error in SPAD, and it makes function not "total"
> (it doesn't return a value for certain inputs), that's a
> bad property.
>
> 2. If we have error for "children", then what about "leaf
