On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Dylan Thurston wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 03:38:59PM +0100, Bjorn Lisper wrote: > > I think MATLAB's matrix language provides about the right level of > > abstraction for a high-level matrix language. You can for instance write > > things like > > > > Y = inv(A)*B > > > > to assign to Y the solution of Ax = B. ... > > Just a comment on a long post... I am personally found of MetaFont's > approach, where you write > > Ax = B > > to find the solution to Ax = B. When working with transformations and > such, being able to write all your equations "forwards" makes it much > easier to keep everything straight; plus, if you have several equations > for a variable, you don't have to figure out how to gather them > together. Can anyone see a way to implement something like this in > Haskell? Or is it better to make a small interpreted language? > > Best, > Dylan Thurston >
why not write some software that does something like let y = ((Matrix A) :*: (Vector X)) := (Matrix B)) data MatrixExp = ... data Sym = A | B | C ... data Unknown = X | Y ... solve :: MatrixExp -> Maybe (Vector Sym) ... ? Jay Cox _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
