Le 31/10/2019 à 00:15, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
.../...
It would be /v//ery/ hard (and easily prone to errors, due to many
specific cases, using parentheses, etc) to parse the input to detect
all possible cases (1-char symbols, multiple-char symbols, literal
numbers with or without exponentia
so nice, as said by Federico ans Samuel pour the next 6.1
Regards
> Message du 31/10/19 19:52
> De : "Federico Miyara"
> A : users@lists.scilab.org
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [Scilab-users] CLR design component is not clear in scilab 6.0.2
> x64 W10
&
Samuel,
Just a detail: in some books the p variable is used as the Laplace
variable, especially when working with normalized variables. For
instance, a normalizad butterworth filter may pe presented as
1/(1 + 2*p + 2*p^2 + p^3)
I recall Bildstein's book on Active filters. See also:
https:/
Dear all, dear Samuel,
Many thanks for your gallery
For me the better d
> Message du 31/10/19 00:16
> De : "Samuel Gougeon"
> A : users@lists.scilab.org
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [Scilab-users] CLR design component is not clear in scilab 6.0.2
>
Le 30/10/2019 à 23:25, Federico Miyara a écrit :
Samuel,
In another e-mail that for some reason was not sent (and was
completely deleted...) I mentioned this page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematical_symbols and
standard ISO 8-2, which in its clause 9, item 2.9.5
I have
Samuel,
In another e-mail that for some reason was not sent (and was completely
deleted...) I mentioned this page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mathematical_symbols and standard
ISO 8-2, which in its clause 9, item 2.9.5 says that symbol for
multiplication is either · or ×, and t
Le 30/10/2019 à 10:26, Perrichon a écrit :
Hello
CLR design component brings confusion by forgetting the * sign in operand
of a polynomial representation in Laplace plan
It makes schemes unreadeable
First, you know that la Laplace variable is always s.
Second, in such specific cases, you ca
Le 30/10/2019 à 21:51, Federico Miyara a écrit :
Dear all,
I think a half-high (centered) dot "·" is a better (and more standard)
multiplication sign, it does not take much space and it cannot be
confused with the decimal separator ".", for instance
1 + Ts·s - A·s^2
1 + 2.·s - 0.27·s^2
Ho
Dear all,
I think a half-high (centered) dot "·" is a better (and more standard)
multiplication sign, it does not take much space and it cannot be
confused with the decimal separator ".", for instance
1 + Ts·s - A·s^2
1 + 2.·s - 0.27·s^2
However, I think the decimal dot shouldn't be used i
Le 30/10/2019 à 12:41, Perrichon a écrit :
Hello Samuel,
Thanks you for your positive response. It gives me hope
For literal numbers, sign « . » is also acceptable instead of sign « * »
With a dot:
With a wider space:
With the original *:
What's the best, in average situation ?
My own pr
Le 30/10/2019 à 12:41, Perrichon a écrit :
Hello Samuel,
Thanks you for your positive response. It gives me hope
For literal numbers, sign « . » is also acceptable instead of sign « * »
Yes, i think i planned using it when i did the job, but then the dot
with a literal decimal number like "2
: [Scilab-users] CLR design component is not clear in scilab 6.0.2
x64 W10
Hello Pierre,
Le 30/10/2019 à 10:26, Perrichon a écrit :
Hello
CLR design component brings confusion by forgetting the * sign in operand
of a polynomial representation in Laplace plan
The "*" sig
Hello Pierre,
Le 30/10/2019 à 10:26, Perrichon a écrit :
Hello
CLR design component brings confusion by forgetting the * sign in operand
of a polynomial representation in Laplace plan
The "*" sign has been removed on purpose, in order to somewhat compact
the expression displayed in the icon
Hello
CLR design component brings confusion by forgetting the * sign in operand
of a polynomial representation in Laplace plan
It makes schemes unreadeable
Could it be corrected in a next version 6.xx
Regards
Here is a first lower pass filter with variable Ts=1 (see also buggzil
14 matches
Mail list logo
