after all the difference between a expansion series and a polynomial is basically that the series contains, at the end, some information about the order of the error (i.e. O(x^n) ) In general, the error term, can not be evaluated to anything meaningful (for x!=0) (but have some properties, for example can be derived respect to x, or that O(x) - O(x) = O(x) -hey, just for curiosity: can something like this be possibly ever implemented?-). Because of the existence of the error term, in my opinion evalm must either fail or evaluate to something that holds the error term in some kind of new type (e.g. error_order type). If to fail (i.e. throw) is the choice, the 'principle of less surprise' can be honored by raising a meaningful exception (with some explanation) I must admit that I have almost no experience with ginac and that I don't fully understand the philosophy of the current developers, but, in my opinion, making every method available (or evaluable) for every type is not the way to solve this kind of problems because in many cases the possible returns could be ambiguous depending on the interpretation and this is more dangerous than throwing exception and tell the user to be more specific in the syntax. Regards, Alfredo On 2/12/07, Chris Dams <Chris.Dams@mi.infn.it> wrote:
Dear Alexei and others,
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Sheplyakov Alexei wrote:
First of all, this violates principle of least surprise. For all other classes map() operates on each term, why pseries should be different?
Okay, then I think it is best to create a method pseries::evalm and have evalm act on every coefficient in the power series. The variable and expansion piont shoulnt' be matrix value anyway, as far as I know. Any objections against that?
Best wishes, Chris
_______________________________________________ GiNaC-list mailing list GiNaC-list@ginac.de https://www.cebix.net/mailman/listinfo/ginac-list