On Jul 7, 2007, at 10:44 , William Stein wrote:
> So I propose that the only symbolic variables that are predefined > are x (since it's so useful to have this predefined), I (=sqrt(-1)), > and e (=2.7...). > If users want a symbolic variable, they have to use the var command. I prefer having nothing defined, although I suppose a case could be made for 'e' and 'I'. If 'x' is pre-defined, then one could as "why not 'y'?", and it's downhill from there :-} Having an explicit "var()" in a computation/script seems preferable. On this subject, the question of "protection" for variable names was raised earlier, but I don't recall the outcome. > One other thing that surprised me was > (1) how little all the symbolic code in SAGE was actually useful for > the workshop, This, I think, really depends on the user's habits, and it's really difficult to predict. I often take advantage of the symbolic stuff, but then I sometimes trip over it. Having it optional, as above, may be the best we can do. > (2) how annoying it was not having decimal literals be floats by > default, and > (3) how annoying it was having certain special functions, e.g., > log, sin, cos, etc., return symbolic values by default > instead of numerical values. On this one, I'm neutral. How many configuration/usage options can we have before it starts getting too complex to deal with? Justin -- Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon at Large Director Institute for the Enhancement of the Director's Income ----------- Nobody knows the trouble I've been ----------- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
