Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

implement MA negation of a polynomial #285

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

implement MA negation of a polynomial #285

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
13 changes: 13 additions & 0 deletions src/operators.jl
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -264,6 +264,19 @@ end
Base.isapprox(p::_APL, α; kwargs...) = isapprox(promote(p, α)...; kwargs...)
Base.isapprox(α, p::_APL; kwargs...) = isapprox(promote(p, α)...; kwargs...)

MA.operate!(::typeof(-), ::AbstractTermLike) = error("not implemented yet")

MA.operate_to!(::AbstractTermLike, ::typeof(-), ::_APL) = error("not implemented yet")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why don't we just keep the MethodError ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AbstractTermLike subtypes _APL, so we have to have a separate method. Do you want me to do throw(MethodError(...)) instead of error("not implemented yet")?


function MA.operate!(::typeof(-), p::_APL)
negate!! = x -> MA.operate!!(-, x)
return map_coefficients!(negate!!, p, nonzero = true)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can use Base.Fix1(MA.operate!!, -) to avoid creating a closure that might allocate

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can use Base.Fix1(MA.operate!!, -)

I prefer to never use either Fix1 or Fix2, because I can never remember which is which. Should I?

to avoid creating a closure that might allocate

In this case this is not an issue, as the closure doesn't capture any variables.

end

function MA.operate_to!(o::P, ::typeof(-), p::P) where {P<:_APL}
return map_coefficients_to!(o, -, p, nonzero = true)
end

# `MA.operate(-, p)` redirects to `-p` as it assumes that `-p` can be modified
# through the MA API without modifying `p`. We should either copy the monomial
# here or implement a `MA.operate(-, p)` that copies it. We choose the first
Expand Down
Loading