On 12/3/06, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 10:38:20 -0800, Joel B. Mohler > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ... > > Perhaps the most important is "Exhibit 2". To my eyes, a function > > definition > > is not complete with-out a clearly defined argument list. Piggybacking > > on > > top of argument lists to polynomial rings seems like it will lead to > > endless > > pains of the nature of the creatures above. > > This is simply how symbolic mathematics, in particular calculus, works. > It does lead to pain and confusion in many calculus classes. I don't > think dealing with this will be easy. But I think it's absolutely crucial > in order for SAGE to ever be a viable alternative to Maple/Mathematica.
Agreed. > All your examples above are very good, and will help inform the design > that we come up with. Thanks! Keep 'em coming! (Could somebody please > post something based on all this into the wiki -- I suddenly only have > limited net access for the next few days). Done. -- Bobby Moretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
