should SUP INT has OrderedRing?
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Qian Yun
5:26 AM (6 hours ago) 5:26 AM
to fricas-devel
Currently SUP INT is only Comparable, not OrderedSet.
But I think the current "smaller?" in SUP satisfies
the properties of "<" ?
Is there a reason not to do this?
- Qian
But I think the current "smaller?" in SUP satisfies
the properties of "<" ?
Is there a reason not to do this?
- Qian
Waldek Hebisch
6:54 AM (5 hours ago) 6:54 AM
to fricas...@googlegroups.com
On Sat, Jun 27, 2026 at 05:26:40PM +0800, Qian Yun wrote:
> Currently SUP INT is only Comparable, not OrderedSet.
>
> But I think the current "smaller?" in SUP satisfies
> the properties of "<" ?
Yes, it is implemented in IDPO which for relevant parameters
> Currently SUP INT is only Comparable, not OrderedSet.
>
> But I think the current "smaller?" in SUP satisfies
> the properties of "<" ?
has OrderedAbelianMonoid.
> Is there a reason not to do this?
--
Waldek Hebisch
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages