Burcin Erocal wrote: > * We could allow this syntax for convenience: > > sage: g(x) = sin + x > > and convert the function arguments to appropriate callable expressions > if the number of arguments of g match the number of arguments of the > given function, raise an error otherwise.
Seems like getting a minor convenience at the price of creating a substantial mess. > * We raise an error whenever a function object is specified without > variables. There's no need to prohibit expressions for which there is not yet an interpretation; let the user decide whether something makes sense. FWIW Robert Dodier --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
