On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 14:35:24 -0700 William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the vote from this dicussion for Sage was to make it so ln and > log are both supported and "log" is base e by default. So in the > future we'll have: > > sage: ln(x) > ln(x) > sage: log(x) > log(x) > > That should make most people happy. How do you think this should be implemented? - define two independent symbolic functions that share the same code for evaluation - have a hidden parameter to indicate the printing preference in the SFunction subclass that implements log The first option means we have to normalize to one of these before any nontrivial processing, e.g., simplification, integral transforms, integration, etc. Second one makes the trivial equality checking for log(x) == ln(x) difficult. In this new system, what will sage: integrate(1/x, x) return? Cheers, Burcin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
