On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote: >
... > > What about nintegrate/nintegral? We don't have these now (as top-level > functions), but they would mirror nicely the integral/integrate > commands. Should we only define one of them? > Is integral_numerical a possibility (for those who like tab-completions)? There are a lot of commands which don't play nice with tab-completion (eg, matrix_plot) but it is nice if we could at least add this as an alias. Also, a former colleague liked Maple's choice of designing the syntax of integral and that of plot (and the 3d versions) to be very similar. That way a student could compute an area and plot the area with roughly the same syntax. Does that seem reasonable? > > Thanks, > > Jason > > > > > -- > Jason Grout > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
