#17447: Clarify and complete documentation of function()
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
schymans | Status: needs_work
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.5
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers: Ralf Stephan
documentation | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | 4585e74063e81a8c332a500d016e837069edf8eb
schymans | Stopgaps:
Report Upstream: N/A |
Branch: |
public/17447 |
Dependencies: |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Changes (by kcrisman):
* cc: zimmerma (added)
Comment:
> I suspect that Zimmerman's calculus book uses this stuff quite
extensively, so deprecating/changing the current behaviour will likely
lead to pushback from him, and probably rightly so.
Cc:ing him for that reason. Though we have already had a few other
discussions on Trac about the need to update our tests while not
maintaining exact compatibility. Since they don't (yet) raise errors, but
apparently only the deprecation warning, should we maybe update the tests
(in that part only) to have the deprecation warning returned? Note that I
don't believe the deprecation warning is even doctested, which is a no-no
:)
Also, does the current branch actually "clarify and complete documentation
of function"? It looks like it mostly fixes doctests.
Another change not doctested is
{{{
if is_SymbolicVariable(dvar):
- raise ValueError("You have to declare dependent variable as a
function, eg. y=function('y',x)")
+ raise ValueError("You have to declare dependent variable as a
function evaluated at the independent variable, eg. y=function('y')(x)")
}}}
which I think happens twice.
I'm ''still'' not sure I even understand some of the subtle differences.
Are there occasions where the old behavior was "right" in the sense that
one wanted that returned, and have we shown how to get that object? What
about the ask.sagemath question?
All that to say that nonetheless it will be great to have a unified
interface on this, if that is really the right thing to do, which from the
comments it apparently is.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17447#comment:18>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
