On Dec 14, 2009, at 12:15 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > Robert Bradshaw wrote: >> On Dec 14, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Carlos Córdoba wrote: >> >>> I have to agree with Marshall, because it could be confusing for new >>> sage users that come from python to see such a different syntax >>> meaning. >>> >>> But what about the Mathematica syntax? Could it be adopted by sage? >> >> The Mathematica syntax is (in my opinion) much less Pythonic than >> using "->" in this context, even if the latter will have another >> meaning in Python 3. > > Does the CAS syntax really mean Python "lambda" though?
Thanks for bringing up this point. No it doesn't, and shouldn't if we adopt this syntax. - Robert > I would think > that using -> in Maple would define something symbolic which one could > manipulate...more like an anonymous > > f(x) = x**2 > > than "lambda x: x**2". For the latter one cannot find symbolic > derivatives and so on. -- 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-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org
