On Dec 15, 2:26 pm, Chris Seberino <[email protected]> wrote:
> I had it turned on but I guess it doesn't get triggered for x (x -1).
Even when you turn it on, the behavior is not uniform as the user
might expect, though there is a logic.
sage: implicit_multiplication(10)
sage: (x) (x-1)
(x - 1)*x
sage: x (x-1)
x - 1
sage: (x-1)x
(x - 1)*x
sage: x(x-1)
x - 1
> Any way to change the behavior or
> does that require a patch to Sage?
>
By the way, this is poorly documented in the sense that
implicit_multiplication?
only refers to `implicit_mul`, which however is not in the global
namespace.
But
sage: sage.misc.preparser.implicit_mul?
gives
Definition: sage.misc.preparser.implicit_mul(code, level=5)
Docstring:
Inserts *'s to make implicit multiplication explicit.
INPUT:
* ``code`` -- a string; the code with missing *'s
* ``level`` -- an integer (default: 5); how aggressive to be in
placing *'s
* 0 - Do nothing
* 1 - Numeric followed by alphanumeric
* 2 - Closing parentheses followed by alphanumeric
* 3 - Spaces between alphanumeric
* 10 - Adjacent parentheses (may mangle call statements)
Perhaps it's time to add a level.
--
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
