kcrisman wrote: >>> What about nintegrate/nintegral? We don't have these now (as top-level >>> functions), but they would mirror nicely the integral/integrate >>> commands. Should we only define one of them? >> Is integral_numerical a possibility (for those who like tab-completions)? > > I don't see why it's a problem for integral and integrate and > nintegral and nintegrate to all live together in peace and freedom. > This isn't namespace pollution - it's called making Sage user-friendly > for people who haven't learned to use the tab-completion yet.
It's not so much namespace pollution as it is unpythonic and confusing. Unpython because: sage: import this ... "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." ... and confusing because tab completion always pulls up both commands, and the instant question is, "there must be some difference between these; which one is right for me?". Are there any other M's that has two integration commands so similarly named that are just aliases for each other? Thanks, Jason -- Jason Grout --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
