>
> Do we really want to show an integral with such internal symbols?
>
> http://axiom-wiki.newsynthesis.org/SandboxPlex
>
>
> (1) -> integral(x^x, x)
>
> x
> ++ %A
> (1) | %A d%A
> ++
>
> (2) -> integral(x^x, x)::OutputForm pretend SExpression
>
> (2) (INTSIGN (NOTHING) x (* (^ %A %A) (CONCAT d %A)))
>
> The internal representation should stay as it is, but the OutputForm
> formatters should rather output something like
>
> ++ x
> | x dx
> ++
Given OutputForm in (2) output (1) is expected. Formatters
should deal with typesetting issues, but should not mess
with semantics (including symbol names).
> In fact, why is that such an internal form? For sum and product there is
> no new internal variable.
Look at:
(8) -> integral(integral(x^x, x), x)
x %A
++ ++ %A
(8) | | %A d%A d%A
++ ++
Type: Expression(Integer)
(9) -> integral(integral(integral(x^x, x), x), x)
x %A %A
++ ++ ++ %A
(9) | | | %A d%A d%A d%A
++ ++ ++
Type: Expression(Integer)
This is not what I want due to using only one dummy, but with
different dummy at each level it would be better than version
with 'x' only.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
