On Tuesday 05 December 2006 02:43, William Stein wrote: > On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 16:03:45 -0800, Robert Bradshaw > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Joel B. Mohler wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 09:46:18AM -0800, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > >>> I think we are thinking of these indetermanents wrongly--they are > >>> dummy variables and have should really have no context outside of the > >>> function definition. Another problem is that, if we say f = sin(a)+cos > >>> (x), then f(1,2) is ambiguous. > > Because the order of arguments is not specified? I disagree to some > extent, since you could likewise say that if f = a*x in Q[a,x], then > f(1,2) is > ambigous. Likewise, in the above example, just use the alphabetical > order of the variable names.
So, you are willing to throw out the ability to order your own arguments? I suppose that technically this doesn't cut down on functionality, but there is quite often I might want a function of 'x' and 'n' and want them in that order. I think this will be *very* annoying in the long run. I also think that single letter variable names will be a strange limitation -- I often want a 'theta' in mathematica. I realize that I could define my own polynomial ring, but thats a strange user requirement to my eyes. So, if we have Q[a,x] and f=x. Is f a function of 1 or 2 variables? I think it should be a function of 2 variables (the a is implicit). I gather that you (William) disagree with this, but I'm not sure how you are going to code that up. I'm also not sure that it will be user comprehensible in the end. -- Joel --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
