First, let me say that I like this proposal. On Dec 6, 2006, at 5:03 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Sage calculus > f = alg expr > > f.subs(var, val, ...) > f.subs(dict) > f.subs(list of pairs) > implement recursively, with base case functions of 1 var and vars and > constants being clear. I would vote for f.subs(var=val, ...) as well. > f.function(*args) - returns a callable version of f, which otherwise > works in same way. Output is result of subs. > this just another formal function, but with a call method. > Also, function((vars...),expr) makes an evaluatable function. The motivation for not providing a call function to begin with is that the arguments have not been specified yet? I still think f(x,y) = sin(x)*cos(x+y+3) is the most "natural" syntax, but alas it requires the preprocessor. > f.derivative(var) - we completely implement. Even if we implement this (which should be relatively easy), should we pass the results to maxima to try and simplify it? On that note, should we have a f.simplify(), etc. method? > f.integral(var, optional endpoints) - feed expr to maxima (or maple or > mathematica or mathomatic or yaccas or??) and let it compute integral > symbolically. Sage_eval the result (if possible - if that fails, > maybe wrap the external object formally). > > Basic functions: all functions like sin, cos, exp, special funcs, > etc, will be defined as formal functions - a lot of this is already > done. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
