For the record: I always thought that InputForm would be intended to provide a means to obtain a construction of an object. Put differently, converting an object x to InputForm and evaluating the result should equal x.
With this idea in mind, I wrote several testcases in FriCAS, and recently the sage interface. So, in case this is changed, the sage interface will have to be adapted. I can see that the original authors may have had a different idea of its meaning, but the name InputForm is actually very telling. Concerning UP and SUP: with the above the definition of InputForm, yes it would be great if they had InputForm (and they should be different, as Waldek pointed out). It's a major annoyance in the interface. Martin -- 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 fricas-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to fricas-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
