One can discuss if in limits of f(x,n) as n-->oo x may depend on n or not but in the following version:
sage: assume(x>-0.99,x<0.99) sage: n=var('n') sage: sage: limit(x^(n+1)/(1-x), n=infinity) -limit(x^(n + 1), n, +Infinity)/(x - 1) sage: assume(x>0) sage: sage: limit(x^(n+1)/(1-x), n=infinity) 0 the dependence of x on n is not essential The limit does not depend on the sign of x so the Maxima behaviour inherited by Sage is inconsistent. On 16 Kwi, 05:56, ancienthart <joalheag...@gmail.com> wrote: > (Respectfully) Then why does splitting the range of values for x into > positive, zero and negative ranges work? > > Joal Heagney -- 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