On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:24:33PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Fredrik Johansson
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Why does it make sense to cover all equalities and inequalities by
> > this one operator Eq? The present syntax is to me like spelling x*y+z
> > as Add(Add(x,'*',y), '+', z) Doesn't it make more sense to define
> > separate Eq, Ne, Lt, Le, Gt, Ge operators?
>
>
> That's right. I was mainly concentrating on the == case. I think "Eq,
> Ne, Lt, Le, Gt, Ge" is even better solution. Plus I think it's also
> useful to have something
> like Op(a, b, "<="), so that one can quickly change this from <= to <
> or > etc., without having to think if > is Lt, or Le, etc.
Right. Op -> Rel ?
--
Всего хорошего, Кирилл.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
