MathGroup Archive 2001

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Unconventional Max[] behavior

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg28097] Re: [mg28048] Unconventional Max[] behavior
  • From: Ralph Benzinger <mma-l at endlos.net>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 04:12:53 -0500 (EST)
  • References: <B6E8F603.BC12%andrzej@platon.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp> <3AC377C1.973FDC73@wolfram.com>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

On March 29, you wrote:
> There is a bug which prevents simplification of Max[e1, e2], 
> whenever e1-e2 is not a number, but Expand[e1-e2] is a number.

Cute -- I'm glad it's a bug and not a feature.  And thanks for the
workaround, which should put me back in business.

> > > A related question to my "discovery": Is there a standard way of
> > > defining a "simplification" rather than an "evaluation" rule?
>
> You can do it using TransformationFunctions option.

Bingo!  That's what I had been looking for.  I think I prefer this
over modifying the definition of Simplify itself.

Ah, excellent, Mathematica and I are friends again ...  Thanks to
everybody for their help.

Ralph

-- 
Ralph Benzinger          "This is my theory, it is mine, I own it,
Cornell University        and what it is, too." -- Ann Elk (Mrs.)


  • Prev by Date: RE: Row spacing in GraphicsArray
  • Next by Date: Re: Defining a flat, orderless, one-identical function?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Unconventional Max[] behavior
  • Next by thread: Re: Unconventional Max[] behavior