Ken writes:
> It does appear to be quite simple in its capabilities and not able to
> handle even moderately complex formulas (exp(2)*exp(3)) in either
> octave or maxima.
Note that if you type exp(2) literally, LyX has to use some heuristics in
order to know what you meant. Actually, it interprets "exp(2)" as "ex p(2)",
i.e., "e" times "x" times "p(2)". You can help interpretation in several ways.
1. use \mathrm to tell LyX what the function name is:
\mathrm{exp}(2)*\mathrm{exp}(3)
2. use a small space to separate the argument of the function:
exp\,(2)*exp\,(3)
3. use the LaTeX function names:
\exp(2)*\exp(3)
4. use standard math:
e^2*e^3
Nevertheless, this could be improved, of course, but heuristics can always
fail. That said, failure or success also depends on the CAS used. Your
particular example (without the corrective steps outlined above) works with
both octave and maxima, but fails with Mathematica (I don't know what happens
with maple).
--
Enrico
