On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 7:06:50 AM UTC-5, Simon King wrote: > > Hi! > > On 2018-11-15, Erik Bray <erik....@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote: > > Perhaps there should be a common suite of unit tests applicable to > > symbolic functions / functions that can return symbolic expressions in > > order to help ensure a consistent interface. This is all pretty > > embarrassing :( > > Could that be a use case of our category framework? I.e., have a > "category of symbolic expressions", whose only object is SR and whose > morphisms are symbolic functions?
There was a fair amount of work done around this a number of years ago, but it was not fully completed (as noted). There is still (I think) a Trac ticket regarding making a "hold" context which would be great, but I think it also would require some meddling in Pynac again to fully implement them. See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24861 for hold of derivatives. Or for limit: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19203 As to the integral of piecewise, that is probably just continuing the previous long-ago piecewise implementation behavior - the notion being that we probably didn't have a way to even use "integrate" before the new piecewise symbolic functions were implemented. Hopefully this would be pretty easy to do by an alias. And the derivatives are similar - when the D[0] notation was implemented there wasn't really a unified interface with the symbolic functions. And that documentation isn't well understood - see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17445 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-release@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-release. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
