Short of a clever python trick which is beyond me, I think to
implement calculus in an insanely easy way, you must fiddle with the
preprocessor.
To illustrate a possible solution (as a starting point for a discussion,
not that I think this will be done), I'll mention an idea of mine which
got shot
down my everyone when I posted it awhile back (maybe last summer):
Change the preparser so that when you want to define (say) a function
like f(x) = sin(x), instead of having to type
sage: f = maxima("sin(x)")
sage: f.integrate("x")
they could type
sage f:= x->sin(x)
sage: integrate(f)
The ":=" would clue the parser that a new type of function is going to be
inputted. I believe this type of notation is used by both gap and maple.
Some simple way of inputting maxima functions is needed and IMHO
this is the main problem to making the calculus commands in SAGE
"insanely easy".
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bobby Moretti wrote:
>
>
> Yes, let's come up with such a strategy. I do think we need a unified
> plan. If not, we run the risk of having a bunch of different
> implementations of software aimed at such people, each having low
> interoperability both amongst themselves and with the other areas of
> SAGE.
>
> Ideas? For starters, perhaps David Kaplan could suggest a couple
> of specific sample problems that he would like to use SAGE to solve,
> and we could think about how:
>
> (1) they could be done, but require unreasonable knowledge of
> algebra
> (2) they can't be easily done right now, but could be if we put
> some additional code in SAGE.
>
> SAGE includes Maxima, and Maxima is extremely capable at Calculus
> related
> computations -- so one question is how to make such capabilities
> available from SAGE without the user having to know anything about
> maxima
> (or even what maxima is). So far SAGE is terrible at this,
> compared to
> how good it could be.
>
>
> Looking at the actual problems that people might want to do is a good
> way to get started. But again, I'd caution against taking too much of
> an ad-hoc approach. I think that calculus is a great place to start.
> First of all, we do have Maxima. Also, having an easy-to-use calculus
> package that displays its output prettily is a must for any
> self-respecting CAS. With jsMath and Maxima, we have a real potential
> to blow away the competition here. And finally, calculus is kind of a
> lowest common denominator among people who are using a CAS. It's
> probably the first thing that any non-mathematician would try... first
> impressions are important.
>
> Re. brainstorming, I'd like to do this. Maybe after the meeting today,
> or sometime on Monday? I know things are busy getting 1.5 ready for
> release, so maybe we should wait until after that gets out the door.
>
>
> --
> Bobby Moretti
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
