On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 12:59:06AM +0100, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> On 10/30/23 13:48, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> > Hmm, I would be more happy with "~>" or maybe "=->".
>
> Yes "~>" would be fine for me. Three letters defeats the idea of having as
> little "non-information" as possible.
>
> > If we insist on 2 character symbol, than "~>" is IMO pretty
> > good one.
>
> Fine. Looks good. Probably better than ":>".
<snip>
> Too unsolvable for now. So to make the story short, I am in favour of
> introducing "~>" which in LaTeX seems to be \leadsto (with symbol
> \rightsquigarrow, as defined in amsfonts.sty and amssymb.sty.
Yes. I am looking at other formatters. For MathML we probably
should use appropriate unicode characters. Two candidates I
found are:
219D;RIGHTWARDS WAVE ARROW
21DD;RIGHTWARDS SQUIGGLE ARROW;
By name the second is better match, but in my Firefox the
first looks a bit better.
> BTW, I wonder whether we could get rid of "TAG" and replace it with "~>" or
> "LEADSTO" and either "->" or "TO", and "+->" or "MAPSTO" as the tags that
> appear in an OutputForm.
I am not sure what you exactly propose. If we use 3 different symbols,
than changing "TAG" to "~>" in source files is reasonable.
--
Waldek Hebisch
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fricas-devel/ZUaOoHMqwc1CSAV2%40fricas.org.
