On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Robert Dodier<robert.dod...@gmail.com> wrote: > > William Stein wrote: > >> Unless you can give a explanation of what you want integrating wrt x^2 >> to mean, I think we should also raise an error in Sage. > > That would be unfortunate. Faced with some unrecognized construct, > the mathematical thing to do is to just leave it be. Whether it's > meaningful is for the user to decide. You don't know what > integrate(f(x), g(x)) means. Why not let someone else come > up with an interpretation? Why must you close that door? > > Incidentally, integrate(f(x), g(x)) = integrate(f(g^(-1)(y)), y), when > g^(-1) is well defined, seems plausible. I'm not saying Sage should > apply such an identity, only that Sage should not prevent the user > from applying it.
+1 Yes, I think now I agree with you. It is better to return it un-evaluated than raising an error. As you, Ondrej and Simon pointed out that for some g, it has un-ambiguous interpretation and may be Sage should apply the identity where possible (definitely for expression with single variable) before passing it to maxima. Cheers, Golam --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
