On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Thierry <sage-googlesu...@lma.metelu.net> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 08:32:23AM -0700, Nils Bruin wrote: >> On Monday, March 19, 2018 at 8:04:07 AM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > - Some functions (mostly inherited from Maxima) *do* already create >> > new symbolic variables, but do not inject them in the relevant >> > namespace. >> > In *this* case (and this case only), I'd like to have this injection >> > done >> > by default, but controllable via an option. *Prima facie,* our targets >> > are solve and desolve + their friends. But I forget some other ones >> > almost >> > surely... Hints ? >> > >> > -2. This is only possible with very comprehensive hacks: the "interactive >> name-space" has no special status outside of IPython. The sage library >> wouldn't have an idea where to insert this stuff. We'd basically require a >> "scratchpad" onto which all code can scribble binding suggestions and then, >> once control comes back to IPython, a decision could be made on iwhether to >> nject these bindings. >> >> > >> > - %(%)auto_constants : control whether Maxima-generated constants are >> > injected in the relevant namespace. Default : True. >> > >> > -2 for the default; -1 in general. There's no trigger event in maxima to >> make these bindings. If you take the sage-maxima interface (which would see >> symbols from maxima it hasn't seen before), you could use that as a >> trigger, but then the behaviour of the interface relies on lifetime >> history! (and the fact that the sage-maxima interface is a memory leak for >> its translation dictionary). >> >> These things happen more often: >> >> sage: matrix(2,2,[1,2,3,4]).charpoly() >> x^2 - 5*x - 2 >> >> creates a polynomial over ZZ. Should IPython rebind x to ZZ['x'].gen() ? >> Only when x is unbound? More generally: >> >> sage: QQ['y','z'] >> Multivariate Polynomial Ring in y, z over Rational Field >> >> should that trigger y and z being bound? > > In the same vein, what about: > > - d+e ? > - i+j ? > - m+n ? > - r+s ? > > Shall the Euler constant, the imaginary number, the numerical > approximation and the R interpreter be locally diabled ? What about > 2*i*pi*j ?
If I could do things over, then none of those would be in the global namespace by default. This is very difficult to change now, due to the assumptions in our docstrings, among other things... > What if some user use the automatic name "plop" in her worksheet and in a > later version Sage adds "plop" into the global namspace ? I regret Sage having a default globals namespace with nearly 2000 items in it. I was too strongly influenced by Magma at the time. I'm really glad that people haven't greatly increased the global namespace during the last few years. -- William (http://wstein.org) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
