On 06/02/2007 08:46 AM, Martin Rubey wrote:
Dear Bill,
"Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/358VariableIsApparentlyAlwaysAssumedToBePosi
tive
The latter filing is more complete and correctly categorised.
Good. Thanks for submitting the report!
Normally I would add my comments directly to the report, but I think this one
deserves a little discussion first because it is important to understand what
Axiom is doing with your commands.
Thanks for your nice explanation. I temporarily forgot that axiom evaluates
all the arguments before passing them to the function. :-) A feature I *really*
love about axiom, by the way.
Bill, that is a really nice explanation of what happens and it should
*not* be forgotten inside the mailing lists.
Thus it first finds a type for f(x), then for x=-1..1, and then tries to find a
fitting signature for draw. However, doesn't axiom sometimes try several
signatures, until it succeeds? Here, it sticks to the very first type it can
find for f(x). It seems that Axiom assumes that compiling a function with two
different signatures yields the same result. Well, that's probably reasonable.
I guess we can close the issue. Maybe we should rename it though?
I would say close it, when someone has started yet another file
"tutorial.pamphlet" (maybe even mathaction is OK) which contains exactly
what Bill has written. There should be several such tutorial sections.
It is good if somebody tells you what actually happens in particular if
you don't expect Axiom's output.
Just recently I gave up on TeXmacs, since I ran into too many problems
that I could not solve and that were not properly explained in a tutorial.
Yes, I think it is even good to show "error messages" and explain why
they appear. If you deal with some software and often find that it
behaves differently from what you expect, you get frustrated.
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
