Am Donnerstag, 23. Februar 2017 13:16:16 UTC+1 schrieb Bill Page: > > 'Martin R' wrote: > > 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. > > The issue is the type of the object. InputForm certainly does provide > a means to obtain the construction of some object but as an input form > (often obtained from just parsing an input string) it usually does not > have sufficient information to re-create an object of a specific type. > Indeed, in the past I considered these cases essentially as bugs or shortcomings. Maybe a bit more precise: I tried to make InputForm behave "essentially" the way described above, because I deemed it desireable to have a simple InputForm if possible. For example, I thought it would be OK that 4::INFORM = 4::NNI::INFORM = 4::POLY INT::INFORM. However, I like that the InputForm of 4 and 4::PF 5 are different.
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.
