Ilya Zakharevich on Thu, 4 Jul 2002 08:41:13 -0400 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: polcoeff() mystery |
On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 02:23:08PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > There are three things to keep in mind: > 1) GP know only about univariate polynomials over a field. "Currently". Given Groebner bases, this should be easy to fix. > 2) 'foo^0 is printed as 1 for every foo., but is internally still 'foo^0 > 3) The same happen for zero complex, quadratic and algebraic numbers. > > There is no such thing as x^2+y*x+z. Why? *This* is what was confusing me so much when "inefficient" internal representation was mentioned. I was doing \x, and saw something very efficient. Which algorithsms assume that a poly is "filled"? Maybe t_POL should be updated by an extra field `a "compressed" version of the poly'; if only one of the fields is present, but another is needed, it may be filled on a "as needed" basis... > Maybe a print function that output 'foo^0 as 'foo^0 not 1 could be useful. \x *must*. Ilya