On 06/26/2010 05:21:21 PM, kcrisman wrote:
> I believe that Ticket #9329 was generated in response to my original
> post, before I understood that there was a Latex issue involved.
> I believe that Ticket #9329 should be deleted (closed or whatever).
But part of your question was also to try to simplify more complicated
expressions, and it does seem reasonable that we could provide a full
nested expression tree for symbolic expressions (rather than having to
iterate something by hand), since we do so for fast_callable (I
think?). Just because we might not do it anytime soon doesn't mean we
can't have a ticket for it! We usually only close tickets it is clear
are duplicates or things we won't fix or are too vague; things which
no one is motivated to provide just stay that way until someone shows
up (and you'd be surprised how many stay open for > 1 year and all of
a sudden get someone working on them).
OK, sure, that makes sense.
I do hope the LaTeX issue gets resolved for you soon, though.
My current theory is that it will be resolved if Ticket #9314
gets fixed. But I don't really know that for sure :-)
- kcrisman
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
