> > > What about nintegrate/nintegral? We don't have these now (as top-level > > functions), but they would mirror nicely the integral/integrate > > commands. Should we only define one of them? > > Is integral_numerical a possibility (for those who like tab-completions)?
I don't see why it's a problem for integral and integrate and nintegral and nintegrate to all live together in peace and freedom. This isn't namespace pollution - it's called making Sage user-friendly for people who haven't learned to use the tab-completion yet. You are awesome if you actually put this together. It is one of the last remaining pieces in unifying some of the calculus stuff, and has been on many minds for a while - without actual progress however : ( So go for it! - kcrisman > There are a lot of commands which don't play nice with tab-completion > (eg, matrix_plot) but it is nice if we could at least add this as an alias. > Also, a former colleague liked Maple's choice of designing the syntax > of integral > and that of plot (and the 3d versions) to be very similar. That way a > student could compute an area and plot the area with roughly the same > syntax. Does that seem reasonable? > > > > > Thanks, > > > Jason > > > -- > > Jason Grout --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
