# Re: Flattening systems of eqns: And the winner is...

• To: mathgroup@smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg10646] Re: Flattening systems of eqns: And the winner is...
• From: "Xah" <xah@best.com>
• Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 03:10:10 -0500
• Organization: Venus & Xah Love Factory
• References: <6a1pj2\$q34@smc.vnet.net>

```(original message attached at the end)

I just want to point out that there are reasons where
SetAttributes[Equal,Listable] may not be a preferred solution than
using Flatten and Thread.

* Some people prefer not to touch build-in functions. * Some people
prefer not to use Attribute system in Mathematica. (me. Because it's
"too" idiomatic programing)

Xah, xah@best.com
http://www.best.com/~xah/Wallpaper_dir/c0_WallPaper.html
New Programing Paradigm: Parallel execution of bugs and C/C++
programers.

----------
In article <6a1pj2\$q34@smc.vnet.net>, Selwyn Hollis
<shollis@peachnet.campus.mci.net> wrote: Recently I posted the
following question:

>What is the  simplest way to convert a system of equations like this:
>{{a,b,...}=={c,d,...}, e==f}
>into this:
>{a==c, b==d,..., e==f}?

I've received several responses, most of which suggest some variation of
Thread and Flatten. However the _best_ response was from Jens,  who
pointed out that one can

SetAttributes[Equal,Listable]

```

• Prev by Date: How do you form a direction field (slope field) in Mathematica?
• Next by Date: Re: Shooting Problem (fwd)
• Prev by thread: Flattening systems of eqns: And the winner is...
• Next by thread: Integrate[Exp[-(1-x)^2]/Sqrt[x],{x,0,Infinity}]