|
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: More on Positive[x]
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg7920] Re: More on Positive[x]
- From: bruck at pacificnet.net (Ronald Bruck)
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 03:22:10 -0400
- Organization: University of Southern California
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
In article <5qkea7$97k at smc.vnet.net>, Raya Firsov-Khanin
<raya at mech.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
:Hi,
:
:Thanks to everybody for replying to my question on how to declare a
:variable positive. I just want to add that if you declare
:
:Positive[x] ^= True
:
:Positive[x] gives you True. However, Positive[1/x] or Positive[x*y] (where
:Positive[y] ^=True) remain unevaluated. So, to work with positive variables
:one needs to formulate a few rules, namely
:
:Unprotect[Positive];
:Positive[1/x_] := Positive[x];
:Positive[x_*y_] := Positive[x]&&Positive[y];
:Positive[x_/y_] := Positive[x]&&Positive[y];
:Positive[x_^n_] := Positive[x];
:Protect[Positive];
One of the pitfalls of modifying a built-in function ;-)
What happens if x and y are both NEGATIVE and you apply your second or
third rules? What happens if x is negative and n is even, in your third
rule?
--Ron Bruck
Now 100% ISDN from this address
Prev by Date:
Re: Problem with Conditiond Function
Next by Date:
Table of euclidean distances...
Previous by thread:
Speeding up calculations by lowering the precision ?
Next by thread:
Table of euclidean distances...
|