OK.
On Tuesday, 27 September 2022 at 17:50:04 UTC+2 David Roe wrote:
> Nils put it well; please don't change __bool__ for p-adic and power
> series. It should be compatible with equality testing.
> David
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 11:44 AM Nils Bruin wrote:
>
>> It seems attractive that for n
Nils put it well; please don't change __bool__ for p-adic and power
series. It should be compatible with equality testing.
David
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 11:44 AM Nils Bruin wrote:
> It seems attractive that for numerical types, bool(a) gives that same
> result as "not(a==0)", which would hopefu
It seems attractive that for numerical types, bool(a) gives that same
result as "not(a==0)", which would hopefully be the same as "a!=0".
It is definitely the case that O(t^5) == 0 is a lot more useful for
computations. For instance, with that in place, Gaussian elimination will
actually sort-o
