[Maxima-bugs] [ maxima-Bugs-2836164 ] rtest_boolean #100 & 101 / Fix

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Bugs item #2836164, was opened at 2009-08-12 13:38
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2836164&group_id=4933

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Lisp Core - Simplification
Group: None
>Status: Closed
Resolution: Duplicate
Priority: 4
Private: No
Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: rtest_boolean #100 & 101 /  Fix

Initial Comment:
The function pred-reverse sometimes returns an unsimplified expression; an example from 
rtest_boolean #100:

(%i14) implies (a%, b%) := (not a%) or b%$
(%i15) implies(aa and bb, cc or dd);
  1> (PRED-REVERSE ((MAND SIMP) $AA $BB))
  <1 (PRED-REVERSE ((MNOT) ((MAND SIMP) $AA $BB)))
(%o15) notaa or notbb or cc or dd
(%i16) ?print(%);
((MOR SIMP) ((MOR SIMP) ((MNOT SIMP) $AA) ((MNOT SIMP) $BB)) $CC $DD) 
(%o16) notaa or notbb or cc or dd

A putative fix:

(defmfun pred-reverse (pred)
  (take '(mnot) pred))



----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus)
Date: 2009-08-20 00:55

Message:
Closing this bug report. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl)
Date: 2009-08-12 13:53

Message:
Sorry--this bug was reported as bug 1725951.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2836164&group_id=4933