On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gaby,
>
> OpenAxiom currently renders package calls in terms of the function $elt:
>
> (1) -> parseString("x^1.2")$InputForm
>
> (1) x^($elt(Float,float)(12,-1,10))
>
Gaby,
OpenAxiom currently renders package calls in terms of the function $elt:
(1) -> parseString("x^1.2")$InputForm
(1) x^($elt(Float,float)(12,-1,10))
Type: InputForm
(2) -> unparse(%)$InputForm
(2) "x^($elt(Float,float)(12
Gaby,
I am concerned about the internal representation of the InputForm
value. I presume that the display (rendering) of InputForm is
essential 1-1 with it's representation - syntax aside. Why is it so
much more complicated than it needs to be? Compare it to the follow
InputForm values generated b
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anyone explain this odd result? Or this even one?
>
> (4) -> (x^1.0)::InputForm
>
> (4)
> (/ (+ (+ (float 0 0 2) (* (float 1 0 2) x)) (float 0 0 2)) (float 1 0 2))
>
>
Try this:
(1) -> x^1.2
5+-+
(1) x\|x
Type: Expression Float
(2) -> %::InputForm
(2)
(/
(+
(+ (float 0 0 2)
(* (+ (+ (float 0 0 2) (* (float 1 0 2) x)) (float 0 0 2))
(**
(/ (+
