Hi Burcin, On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Burcin Erocal <bur...@erocal.org> wrote: > Some time next week, I will put a clean version of the switchover > patch, along with a new pynac package and some fixes to the sage > library so others can reproduce the results above.
Great! eager to test them. > After looking through the errors caused by the switch, I have a few > questions: > - Syntax for derivative and integrate functions: > > Current symbolics allows this: > > sage: (x^2).integrate() > x^3/3 > > I propose to make the integration variable explicit, by deprecating > this use, and encouraging the use of this: > > sage: (x^2).integrate(x) > x^3/3 > > Note that the MMA syntax for Integrate also asks for the variable > explicitly. > > Same goes for .derivative(), current symbolics works without specifying > a variable. While this usage might be ok in a univariate polynomial > ring, where the variable is known already, I think it's better to ask > the user to explicitly state the variable. +1. I strongly agree with you. IMHO, one should be strict with the syntax for symbolics. From my personal experience, I have been bitten by the "convenience factor" several times. I got completely wrong answers when there were typing mistakes. Sage instead of raising errors gave legitimate answers by interpreting typing mistakes as the "convenient" syntax. Thanks, Golam --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
