[Axiom-math] Re: [open-axiom-devel] [fricas-devel] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: iterators and cartesian product.

[Francois Maltey]

Hello, again

> It's ok, but way should we require the dummy variable 't' when we can
> operate directly on functions with the higher-order function
> 'product'? I think
> 
>    t +-> [|wholePart t, sin t|]
> 
> is just a slightly awkward way to write:
> 
>   product(wholePart,sin)

Is it the reason why you want a ?function? product (A->X, A->Y, ...) ?

> 
> > It's a good thing that record will remain mutable and the other
> > structure product won't be mutable. So there is no ambiguity.
> >
> 
> Maybe there should be both 'Record' and 'Record!' where as usual the !
> denotes mutability?
> 
I'm mot sure : mathematics don't speak about record but product
or << couples or triplets or n-uplet in French >> or Tupple ?

And Record! is the most logic, but perhaps not usable because everybody 
think << Record >>.