> - this code is in Boot and I prefer to move functionality to Spad > - convention that empty list as a script means omited script is > local to Symbol, so I prefer to handle it here instead of > spreading it to unrelated places.
Understandable and agreed. But my point was more that the printing routine has to cope with whatever it gets as input. UNLESS there is a clear specification that empty indices must not be represented by empty lists but rather by omitting the entry completely, the printing routing must handle empty lists equivalently to omitting that entry. In that sense we currently have a bug. I know we live in an imperfect world, but I'd like to make it more perfect. I don't want to guess what a function does, but rather have a clear specification. Otherwise there is no way to tell whether the function behaves "correctly". Ralf -- 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.
