On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Ralf Stephan <gtrw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Symbolic expressions are tested for zero with bool(ex) at the moment, > regardless if one wants to know if ex is identical with the zero object > or if one wants a simplification of ex (which is slow). > > Because a finer-grained interface is needed that does not surprise the > user I would like to have your opinion how the function should be > named that attempts a simplification/proof. > > [ ] - ex.holds() and holds(ex) > [ ] - ex.truth() and truth(ex) > [ ] - your idea: ... > > Thanks in advance for your opinion!
So you want to name a function that tests whether or not ex is "identical with the zero object". What about ex.is_zero_object() or ex.is_identical_to_zero() or ex.is_zero(simplify=False) ex.is_zero(simplify=True) -- William > > You can see the bigger picture with code at: > http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19040 > > Regards, > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William (http://wstein.org) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
