On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Golam Mortuza Hossain <gmhoss...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
> for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
>
> My proposals are:
>
> (1) These generalized functions be included in a new module as
>
> "sage.functions.generalized"
>
> (2) Dirac delta:
>
> (a) represented as: "dirac_delta" [ex. dirac_delta(x) ]
> (b) latex name : "\delta"
> (c) dirac_delta(0) : will return a symbolic expression "dirac_delta(0)"
>
>
> (3) Heaviside Theta:
>
> (a) represented as: "heaviside_theta"
> (b) latex name : "\theta"
> (c) heaviside_theta(0) = 1/2
Why not just heaviside? I've never heard of Heaviside Theta. For most
purposes, unit step and heaviside will have the same effect (eg, if you take
their Laplace transforms) so you may not even need both.
>
>
>
> (3) Unit Step:
>
> (a) represented as: "unit_step"
> (b) latex name : "{\rm u}"
> (c) unit_step(0) = 1
>
>
> These conventions closely follow MMA conventions.
What is that? I googled MMA convention and found nothing relevant.
Will these generalized functions form a vector space?
Will, for example, sin(t)*unit_step(t) be defined?
If so, will you provide a plotting and _latex_ method for it?
>
>
> 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
