Dear Bobby,
On Feb 9, 12:26 pm, "Bobby Moretti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We chose this since triple equals seemed ridiculous.
Certainly i understand that you had to make a choice, and i agree that
it is a reasonable choice.
Certainly i agree that a change would be destructive,
and certainly for a mathematician
sage: solve(x^2 - 2 == 0, x)
or even more
sage: solve(x^2 - 2 = 0, x)
is very intuitive.
Confusing is it only for those who did programming before. In
solve(x^2 - 2 == 0, x), i would guess that the "equation" is first
evaluated, and it becomes solve(False,x).
Is it technically possible that Sage generally interpretes "==" as a
test for equivalence, *except* if it is used inside "solve"?
> If not ==, what would you propose for creating symbolic expression
> objects? The other obvious choice is eq(f, g), but I think that this
> is inferior since it is much harder to guess.
How often does one need an equation *outside solve*? I never did!
So, if one really wants an equation as an object, why not eq(f,g)?
And if one wants to use solve, why not in that way:
sage: solve(x^2,'=',2,x) # solves x^2=2
sage: solve(x^2,'<',2,x) # solves x^2<2
etc.
Or:
sage: solve(x^2-2,x)
This would solve x^2-2=0, and i think there are CAS who have that
syntax in a solve command!
Yours
Simon
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
