On 19 August 2016 at 14:24, Nils Bruin <nbr...@sfu.ca> wrote: > On Friday, August 19, 2016 at 9:45:12 AM UTC-7, Bill Page wrote: >> >> My main question is whether we should try to replicate what is done >> by ExpressionNice and thereby render it obsolete or should we try >> to reach some other compromise? > > Well, as is pointed out in the ExpressionNice documentation already, > it produces some representations that just don't express the meaning > of the underlying expression, so we definitely don't want to replicate > that. >
I think it is wrong to say that this notation does not express the meaning of the underlying expression - at most you might claim that it is ambiguous in some cases. My understanding is that this is a notational preference (at least for the designers of SageManifolds) and for them the meaning is clear enough as well as sufficiently brief, although even SageManifolds provides an option to display derivatives in Pynac form if desired. > ... > I think this covers the most important cases. Comments welcome on what > styles people would prefer. > Probably the only way to make a sufficient number of people happy enough to get a positive review on this ticket would be to implement several major alternative notations for derivatives and an easy way to switch between them. Then the only thing there is to argue about is which one should be the default. :) Bill. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
