[Om] Multistep "equation" symbol?

David Carlisle davidc at nag.co.uk
Thu May 14 00:20:35 CEST 2009

> Then this could be something like
> @(M,R,a_0,a_1,\ldots,a_n) = @(and,@(R,a_0,a_1),@(M,R,a_1,\ldots,a_n))

with one syntactic variation, if I read this right it's the same as the
predicate_on_list symbol proposed to be added as part of the support for
MathML3, (obviously the idea is in the air...)  see




I think that essentially the only difference  is that rather than being
cast as an n-ary operator redicate_on_list cast as a binary one taking
an explict list as second argument, so in the above notation the usage is


Having the explict list constructor there makes it slightly more verbose
but avoids the problem Michael alluded to that it's hard to  to
decompose an n-ary constructor to talk about the individual arguments
but a list arguent can be deconstructed with symbols from the list Cd to
refer to (say) the kth item, even if the items are not listed explitly.


The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 

More information about the Om mailing list