- Home
- Get A Printable Dictionary
- Search Best Words
- Recent Changes
- How You Can Help
- valsi - All
- valsi - Preferred Only
- natlang - All
- natlang - Preferred Only
- Languages
- XML Export
- user Listing
- Report Bugs
- Utilities
- Status
- Help
- Admin Request
- Create Account
|
Discussion of "cpolinomi'a"
Comment #1:
Commentary
|
Curtis W Franks (Tue Jan 21 19:23:52 2014)
|
We now have a way to specify formal polynomials (as opposed to polynomial functions). I propose that tefsujme'o be used strictly for the latter situation and ve redefined accordingly. I was thinking that we should generalize both definitions to be at least usable for Laurent polynomials/series (resp.); perhaps for Taylor expansions too.
We now have a word for coefficient of a polynomial, which was not immediately clear before.
|
-
Comment #2:
Re: Commentary
|
Curtis W Franks (Sun Apr 19 19:14:41 2015)
|
krtisfranks wrote: > We now have a way to specify formal polynomials (as opposed to polynomial > functions). I propose that tefsujme'o be used strictly for the latter > situation and ve redefined accordingly. > I was thinking that we should generalize both definitions to be at least > usable for Laurent polynomials/series (resp.); perhaps for Taylor > expansions too. > > We now have a word for coefficient of a polynomial, which was not > immediately clear before.
I think that it may be better for the coefficients to be presentes in an ordered list with the first coefficient presented being the leading coefficient and then each subsequent coefficient being associated with the power of the variable decreased by one per entry in the list such that any nonspecified coefficients are assumed to be 0. In this way, the list would work more like ki'o; additionally, the leading coefficient is the most important one and should be easiest to reference and specify. (Note: the first coefficient specified would typically be forced to be nonzero under this proposal)
|
-
|
|
Comment #3:
Some more issues
|
Curtis W Franks (Sat Apr 30 18:04:26 2016)
|
The indeterminate could be understood to belong to another structure (particularly, the domain, when understood as a function). But in algebra, this really is not necessary. I am not sure whether or not to support it.
I think that I am going to reverse the order of the coefficients, since we want the order to match the default of po'i'oi and the highest-degree coefficient is the most important one.
|
-
|
|