On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Golam Mortuza Hossain<[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am preparing patches that will resolve > > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6465 > > and will also move symbolic integration as a sub-class > of SFunction into new symbolics. > > > Currently, Sage allows omitting variable of integration for convenience. > However, this convenience comes at a hefty price by making Sage > syntax highly inconsistent. On top of this, it mask genuine typing error > as a valid input. > > For example: "integrate(f(x), x, a, )" is treated as "integrate(f(x), x, x, > a)" > where user may have wanted to type "integrate(f(x), x, a, b)" but > missed the "b". > > Given we are moving to a new settings, I am proposing that we make > integration syntax bit stricter and consistent now. In particular, we allow > only > following inputs as valid > > (1) integrate( f(x), x) > (2) integrate( f(x), (x,a,b) ) > (3) integrate( f(x), x, a, b)
I suggest getting rid of (3) if only to support the following syntax for multiple integrals without ambiguity: integrate(f(x,y,z), (x,a,b), (y,c,d), (z,e,f)) Fredrik --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
