On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Golam Mortuza
Hossain<gmhoss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Jason Grout<jason-s...@creativetrax.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> (4) Should we switch to old maxima format for "diff"?
>>
>> Can you clarify with an example what you mean? In other words, can you
>> give an example of the "new" way and the "old" way?
>
> In new symbolics, "df(x)/dx" is
>
> (a) represented as: D[0] f(x)
> (b) typeset as: D[0] f(x)
>
>
> In old symbolics, the same was
>
> (a) represented as: diff( f(x), x)
> (b) typeset as: \frac{d f(x)}{d x}
Is it even possible to use the old typesetting format with the new
symbolic representation? For example, "df(sin(x)*cos(x))/dx" is
represented as -(sin(x)^2 - cos(x)^2)*D[0](f)(sin(x)*cos(x)); it seems
likely to be difficult to invert that to produce
{{{\it \partial}}\over{{\it \partial}\,x}}\,f\left(\cos x\,\sin x \right)
(which is what the old symbolics produced). And what should
"D[0](f)(sin(x)*cos(x))" be typeset as?
Carl
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
