On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Mike Hansen<mhan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> IMO, it is alright if GiNaC uses this particular format for internal
>> processing.
>> However, printing the output (either the raw or the typeset version) in the
>> new
>> format ("D[0](f)") is at best confusing.
>
> It's not just a matter of how things are printed. For example, consider
>
> sage: f = function('f')
> sage: f(x^2).diff(x)
> 2*x*D[0](f)(x^2)
>
> where GiNaC automatically applies the chain rule as opposed to something like
>
> diff(f(x^2), x).
OK, got it.
I guess, it shouldn't be difficult to typeset the expression as earlier
even with the new format. We just need to parse it differently.
Could you please give some clue on how exactly the typesetting with new
symbolics are supposed to work? Is there a _latex_ class method for
symbolic expression somewhere in the new symbolics?
(Earlier there was a "_latex_" method for the class SymbolicFunctionEvaluation.
>From there I could call a function such as
"misc.latex.latex_symbolic_function(self)" )
If yes, then I should be able to salvage most of the code from an old
patch.
Thanks,
Golam
Now let me ask,
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
