Hi, On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Jason Grout<[email protected]> wrote: >>> I think Sage is less consistent in syntax and less powerful than MMA in >>> some things, like plotting and differential equations. >> >> Jason, its great that you brought out this issue about inconsistent syntax. >> It would be really good if we make some efforts to make sage syntax >> more consistent. >> >> For example, >> >> (1) integral and numerical_integral: >> >> integral( sin(x), x, 0, pi) is valid syntax but >> numerical_integration(sin(x), x, 0, pi) is not. > > And plot(x, (x, 0, pi)) is valid, but integral(sin(x), (x, 0, pi)) is not.
Are there any obvious issue in supporting this syntax (along with current syntax) for integral and numerical_integral? I am currently working with symbolic integration and if there are no objection in supporting the above syntax then I will add the support for it. It may be a good idea to keep a wiki for list of functions those are exposed to users and needs some tweaks to make them coherent. It will improve the usability of Sage. Cheers, Golam --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
