David Joyner wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Burcin Erocal <bur...@erocal.org> wrote:
>> Hi again,
>>
>> This is the last in the series of symbolics related emails today. :)
>>
>> I'm looking for comments to trac #5607, which has this summary:
>>
>>
>> In a comment to #5413 Jason pointed out the following confusing
>> behavior:
>>
>> sage: g(x)=sin
>> sage: g(3)
>> sin(3)
>> sage: g(x)=sin+x
>> sage: g(3)
>> sin + 3
>>
>> sage: g(x)=sin+cos; g(3)
>> sin + cos
>>
>> I think the syntax for this should be:
>>
>> sage: g(x) = sin(x) + 3
>> sage: g(3)
>> sin(3) + 3
>>
>> sage: g(x) = sin(x) + cos(x)
>> sage: g(3)
>> sin(3) + cos(3)
>
>
> No objection. However, I think
>
> sage: t = var("t")
> sage: g = function("g",t)
> sage: g = sin + t
> sage: g(3)
> sin(3) + 3
Note that here, you are redefining g with the functon sin+t (i.e., you
are replacing g as a variable; the function g(t) doesn't exist anymore).
In other words, these 4 lines have exactly the same effect as:
sage: t = var("t")
sage: g = sin + t
sage: g(3)
sin(3) + 3
So the above behavior should change; that's what this thread was all about.
Jason
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
