Menu
▾
▴
maxima-discuss
|
From: Gunter K. <gu...@pe...> - 2015-12-14 19:15:31
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 In the meantime Andrej did some lisp magic that makes wxMaxima display x_y as a subscripted variable if y is a integer, only one char long or if this has been defined by a rather fain-grained control => We have a easy - and quite readable way to input subscripted variables. Kind regards, Gunter. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWbxUlXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1M0YwNDdDRTY2QjkxQjBGNzI0QzU0NUQ1 Qzg2QzBFNDIxMUQ1QjhFAAoJEFyGwOQhHVuO4WUQAJ+I8DJgUjVO/hkcBXcZGggU CRiy9xO5u4YFTAjVeXoTPtyb39Ji1oW3wVhLh9uP57eAphJlUx4HbPd+5w5sLmUs aj453u70/64Lrgm+EZaSyLe48N7Kt4Lo0RpFngaSCDpr7LdS/GyJCCzuB+9Kuzmm GlzjcbE+zq1G3ZC1TQHW5u70U11X8Lt3/p/PwYF89yyKm+AF1M1XkelVs3gdBlv6 v2rfgRdTIurjew6Ox0FT9s2cN/MK6/YrB2SIeh1phO+rZZ+fkTzTlXcPLXcPD/eH 58Ja8PD/4IEw+r7tUvfwQPBOkEYMWlg2coKsFXJgF7T25dPym/Fpr2blETpYkJfm 0saDMQx4NKLP1GlsPgTaV3iOqZfCl+cqy+XTD9iojMS+sYpkWpx/j4Ta/YinBmv6 Z5rtlnss9wpcawJyv4R5yAAymZ2se4Uir7tVARV/aL1DJd8dLbmQOiwTPbrIJD9o sfYZ/L1aY2ULDuXbYf9Se+mu5EUlR0sGnjKbOzTdBiF4J532EQBe1uU5NLKEtiW3 B5Kg9u1sTq/3VVOWe1uod+2rRvGeM7NtUQSwQ9rCgWIy1YEPRLuK5BmO4t5E8cmi 6D/7X9uX3AS3ISeKrqssoZQJZJGuaRQES0VIeroz3Bjdbqx4WhXa4VgfxCZ+Bvhx qJvJOq15xcbndpQHSI9t =rYsF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Roland S. <ma...@ro...> - 2015-12-14 21:50:26
|
> From: Michel Talon [mailto:ta...@lp...] > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 9:29 PM >I am still perplexed that you are using > formal computation in high school in Germany. Either all your young people > at school are geniuses, or they are skipping the step where you learn the > basics, how you multiply small matrices by hand, etc. If they all BECOME geniuses, it will probably be thanks to Maxima. Because it is so much fun to work and learn with it! (... of course after having multiplied the first two or three matrices by hand.) > -----Original Message----- > From: Michel Talon [mailto:ta...@lp...] > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 9:29 PM > To: max...@li... > Subject: Re: [Maxima-discuss] Encoding of bold, underscored, subscripted > and superscripted identifiers by wxmaxima > > Le 14/12/2015 16:55, Roland Salz a écrit : > > It's only for this type of application that my original proposal was > > meant for. That's why my original idea was to keep the whole matter > > within wxmaxima and not touch maxima itself and the other interfaces. > > The proposed matters are only user-interface matters of this specific > interface wxmaxima. > > Actually, I would not consider it so much of a problem if such > > features would be limited to wxmaxima. As long as they don't create > > conflicts within wxmaxima itself, I think it should be ok. Such > > features could be marked clearly in the documentation as only being > > applicable to wxmaxima. The purposes of the different user interfaces > > are different, so I think a certain amount of discrepancy would be tolerable. > > I completely agree with what you say. If the problem is to tweak wxmaxima > in order to get more beautiful notation in wxmaxima, this is perfect, and of > course it may be useful for students. I am still perplexed that you are using > formal computation in high school in Germany. Either all your young people > at school are geniuses, or they are skipping the step where you learn the > basics, how you multiply small matrices by hand, etc. before handing the task > to a computer without having any idea what the computer does. Of course, > at a higher level, namely at university, it is very important to become familiar > with symbolic computation, because it is necessary for doing very complex > computations without error (as a matter of fact, mathematicians of the > 19 century were able to perform extremely complex computations by hand, > e.g. Jacobi, Sylvester, Kowalevsky etc. did computations that are hard to > reproduce with a computer), but in this case notation is a secondary aspect. > > > > -- > Michel Talon > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > _______________________________________________ > Maxima-discuss mailing list > Max...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss |
|
From: Michel T. <ta...@lp...> - 2015-12-14 22:33:48
|
Le 14/12/2015 22:50, Roland Salz a écrit : > If they all BECOME geniuses, it will probably be thanks to Maxima. Because > it is so much fun to work and learn with it! (... of course after having > multiplied the first two or three matrices by hand.) By the way, for high school students, there is the fascinating exploration of elementary geometry theorems using symbolic computation and Descartes's idea of reduction to algebra of geometry in the maple program by Doron Zeilberger http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/PG/RENE Unfortunately for us, Zeilberger, who is a genius in combinatorics, has written all his programs in Maple, so they are waiting a translation in maxima. The theorems themselves can be seen online in: http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/PG/Theorems.html He has a large number of maple programs related to his research interests in combinatorics in http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/programs.html so he proves by example that symbolic computation can be very useful. -- Michel Talon |
|
From: Robert D. <rob...@gm...> - 2015-12-14 22:07:18
|
On 2015-12-14, Barton Willis <wi...@un...> wrote: > Would something like http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/Subscript.html > be a start? I'd guess users would want things like diff(subscript(x,k), > subscript(x,l)) --> kron_delta(k,l) I dunno, it seems like such a scheme would make it necessary to somehow make subscript(x, l), superscript(x, l), presubscript(x, l), and presuperscript(x, l) all act just the same as x[l]. That sounds like a lot of work. I'm pushing the idea that pre/post super/subscripts are properties of indices. One would write x[i, j, k, l] (or whatever number of indices) and separately declare that the first index is a presuperscript, the second whatever, etc. That way (1) the computational properties are unchanges, and (2) any display system which doesn't know about different kinds of indices displays it as it does now. These both seem like a big win to me. What do you think? best Robert Dodier |
|
From: Michel T. <ta...@lp...> - 2015-12-14 22:16:07
|
Le 14/12/2015 23:06, Robert Dodier a écrit : > I'm pushing the idea that pre/post super/subscripts are properties of > indices. One would write x[i, j, k, l] (or whatever number of indices) > and separately declare that the first index is a presuperscript, the > second whatever, etc. That way (1) the computational properties are > unchanges, and (2) any display system which doesn't know about different > kinds of indices displays it as it does now. These both seem like a big > win to me. What do you think? This seems like a very nice idea. Moreover this would open the way to an automatic check that indices are properly contracted and summed, e.g. in general relativity computations. -- Michel Talon |
|
From: Raymond T. <toy...@gm...> - 2015-12-14 22:33:25
|
>>>>> "Michel" == Michel Talon <ta...@lp...> writes:
Michel> Le 14/12/2015 23:06, Robert Dodier a écrit :
>> I'm pushing the idea that pre/post super/subscripts are properties of
>> indices. One would write x[i, j, k, l] (or whatever number of indices)
>> and separately declare that the first index is a presuperscript, the
>> second whatever, etc. That way (1) the computational properties are
>> unchanges, and (2) any display system which doesn't know about different
>> kinds of indices displays it as it does now. These both seem like a big
>> win to me. What do you think?
Michel> This seems like a very nice idea. Moreover this would open the way to an
Michel> automatic check that indices are properly contracted and summed, e.g.
Michel> in general relativity computations.
Yes, that would be nice.
But I wonder how maxima (not wxMaxima) will display it. Will it be
i k
x
j l
Currently x[2]*y is displayed as
x y
2
I think it would be hard to distinguish between x * y(pre-subscript
2):
x y
2
The difference being where the extra space is. This can be solved
with parens, but lots of parens makes it hard to read too (to match up
all the parens).
--
Ray
|
|
From: Robert D. <rob...@gm...> - 2015-12-15 00:07:00
|
On 2015-12-14, Raymond Toy <toy...@gm...> wrote: > But I wonder how maxima (not wxMaxima) will display it. Will it be > > i k > x > j l Yeah, that's what I was thinking. > Currently x[2]*y is displayed as > > x y > 2 > > I think it would be hard to distinguish between x * y(pre-subscript > 2): > > x y > 2 I dunno, I'm not too worried about if. If someone doesn't like that, they don't need to make the index a pre-subscript .... best, Robert Dodier |
|
From: Richard F. <fa...@be...> - 2015-12-15 00:16:35
|
My suggestion is that if you are used fixed size and spacing fonts and cannot reliably distinguish x 2 and x 2 where one of them is x presubscript 2 and the other is 2^x Then you should display x presubscript 2 as x[2]. Or... There are other linear notations one can make up, e.g. x_4cornerscounterclockwise_nil_nil_nil_2 or Fourcornersclockwise(x,nil,nil,nil,2) or whatever MathML encoding provides. Axiom used to (maybe still does) have a way of specifying notations in all 4 corners. On 12/14/2015 4:06 PM, Robert Dodier wrote: > On 2015-12-14, Raymond Toy <toy...@gm...> wrote: > >> But I wonder how maxima (not wxMaxima) will display it. Will it be >> >> i k >> x >> j l > Yeah, that's what I was thinking. > >> Currently x[2]*y is displayed as >> >> x y >> 2 >> >> I think it would be hard to distinguish between x * y(pre-subscript >> 2): >> >> x y >> 2 > I dunno, I'm not too worried about if. If someone doesn't like that, > they don't need to make the index a pre-subscript .... > > best, > > Robert Dodier > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Maxima-discuss mailing list > Max...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss |
|
From: Robert D. <rob...@gm...> - 2015-12-15 01:58:31
|
On 2015-12-15, Richard Fateman <fa...@be...> wrote: > My suggestion is that if you are used fixed size and spacing fonts and > cannot reliably distinguish > where one of them is x presubscript 2 and the other is 2^x > > Then you should display x presubscript 2 as x[2]. Or... Or, um, don't use presubscript notation. > There are other linear notations one can make up, e.g. > x_4cornerscounterclockwise_nil_nil_nil_2 Notations like that are clumsy -- I'm not too fond of anything that encourages using 'concat' to construct symbols -- but what's worse is that such an object is no longer the same kind of thing as the existing x[2]. I think that's a show-stopper. best Robert Dodier |
|
From: Leo B. <l_b...@us...> - 2015-12-14 17:39:11
Attachments:
uc.png
|
"Roland Salz" <ma...@ro...> writes: > Hi, > > > > Mathematical literature makes extensive use of bold characters in order to > give semantic value to identifiers, e.g. mark an identifier to be a vector > or a tensor. Actually, this is an incorrect statement. As a mathematician, I would characterize the use of boldface font in order to distinguish "vectors" from "scalars" as a crutch used by non-mathematicians (which we propagate in teaching non-mathematicians). > In order to keep formulas readable, every identifier is kept as > short as possible, even though loaded with all the information necessary. > Unfortunately, in programming languages 'bold' is not a semantic value but > merely a style of presentation. The user of maxima, if he thinks > mathematically in bold - non bold categories, has to somehow translate this > semantic difference, but he does not find a really satisfying way. > Identifiers become longer and formulas less readable. Unicode has an extended set of characters that let you capture much of this. See the attached screenshot for a sample in Maxima (run inside Emacs), using the unicodedate package. This is orthogonal to your suggestions and the other comments in this thread. Leo |
|
From: Raymond T. <toy...@gm...> - 2015-12-16 23:17:33
|
>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Dodier <rob...@gm...> writes:
Robert> On 2015-12-16, Raymond Toy <toy...@gm...> wrote:
>> And you're wrong aobut forcing people. I may not want to use it, but
>> perhaps the only package that solves a problem for me uses it. Now I
>> have two choices: use the package, or write my own.
Robert> Well, three, actually.
Robert> put('foo, false, 'display_indices);
Which isn't really all that appealing either. Now I get to find the
all the variables.
Don't get me wrong. I rather like the display. But I'm going to
confuse the pre and post subscripts. Maybe I'm the only one who
doesn't use wxmaxima and my concerns are irrelevant, but may be not.
--
Ray
|
|
From: Kris K. <kat...@gm...> - 2015-12-16 23:48:28
|
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 03:17:16PM -0800, Raymond Toy wrote:
> >>>>> "Robert" == Robert Dodier <rob...@gm...> writes:
>
> Robert> On 2015-12-16, Raymond Toy <toy...@gm...> wrote:
> >> And you're wrong aobut forcing people. I may not want to use it, but
> >> perhaps the only package that solves a problem for me uses it. Now I
> >> have two choices: use the package, or write my own.
>
> Robert> Well, three, actually.
>
> Robert> put('foo, false, 'display_indices);
>
> Which isn't really all that appealing either. Now I get to find the
> all the variables.
>
> Don't get me wrong. I rather like the display. But I'm going to
> confuse the pre and post subscripts. Maybe I'm the only one who
> doesn't use wxmaxima and my concerns are irrelevant, but may be not.
I never use wxmaxima and I also see the potential for confusion with the
pre and post scripts. Your previous suggestion of using extra
parentheses is not ideal, but I agree that it would be better than
nothing. I can't think of a better idea right now.
This discussion has gotten quite long and it's hard to keep track of all
of the emails (and a portion of them seem to only pertain to
wxmaxima...), but I do want to say that I think having the ability to
control the sub/superscripts is useful and I think that Robert's method
for doing so looks simple and nice.
Cheers,
Kris Katterjohn
|
|
From: Martin M. <mar...@gm...> - 2015-12-15 16:45:06
|
>All the people i know who make heavy use of symbolic >computation (be it in maxima, maple or mathematica) use the following >workflow: type the command in a text editor (vi, emacs, etc.) copy >paste in a console running the computation, modify the command in the >editor if one is not happy with the result, and iterate. This is the way >to get a clean copy of all the steps involved. Does there exist an editor which can make autocomplete without calculating so I can write the code and then calculate it. But the editor should show me when I begin a function the parameters which this function need? 2015-12-14 18:39 GMT+01:00 Leo Butler <l_b...@us...>: > "Roland Salz" <ma...@ro...> writes: > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Mathematical literature makes extensive use of bold characters in order > to > > give semantic value to identifiers, e.g. mark an identifier to be a > vector > > or a tensor. > > Actually, this is an incorrect statement. As a mathematician, I would > characterize the use of boldface font in order to distinguish "vectors" > from "scalars" as a crutch used by non-mathematicians (which we > propagate in teaching non-mathematicians). > > > In order to keep formulas readable, every identifier is kept as > > short as possible, even though loaded with all the information necessary. > > Unfortunately, in programming languages 'bold' is not a semantic value > but > > merely a style of presentation. The user of maxima, if he thinks > > mathematically in bold - non bold categories, has to somehow translate > this > > semantic difference, but he does not find a really satisfying way. > > Identifiers become longer and formulas less readable. > > Unicode has an extended set of characters that let you capture much of > this. See the attached screenshot for a sample in Maxima (run inside > Emacs), using the unicodedate package. > > This is orthogonal to your suggestions and the other comments in this > thread. > > Leo > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Maxima-discuss mailing list > Max...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > > |
|
From: Leo B. <l_b...@us...> - 2015-12-15 18:24:41
|
Richard, I have cc'd my reply to the Maxima list. See below for more. Richard Fateman <fa...@be...> writes: > HI Leo -- Is there a simple instruction sheet that says how to type > one of those characters > like the small superscript 2 or the - whatever it is -- Black Forest? > -- letter? In Emacs, C-x 8 RET is bound to ucs-insert, which gives an interactive prompt in the minibuffer to insert a wide character. E.g. C-x 8 RET superscript two => ² C-x 8 RET MATHEMATICAL FRAKTUR CAPITAL A => 𝔄 Tab completion is supported. https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Inserting-Text.html#Inserting-Text https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/emacs/Input-Methods.html#Input-Methods > > It seems to me that it might be done with a huge palette or set of > them with all (?) Unicode > characters. Yeah, that is essentially what C-x 8 RET provides. > > But is this user interface good enough? What works for me (not in > Maxima but in papers), > is TeX commands like $ \bold. ...$ . > And will unicode do hat/underline/ other > non-spacing characters whose width and height depends on the adjacent > character? To varying degrees, yes. Modern LaTeX also provides this unicode support by translating the unicode characters into TeX macros. Non-spacing characters seem to be a bit of a problem, though, and I haven't figured out how to use them properly. > > Otherwise, cute picture :) > > (I don't expect Maxima to do perfect typesetting -- I have always > found it useful to > edit, after the fact. And I wrote the first version of mactex. Agreed and acknowledged. Leo |
|
From: Raymond T. <toy...@gm...> - 2015-12-15 19:52:09
|
>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Dodier <rob...@gm...> writes:
Robert> On 2015-12-14, Raymond Toy <toy...@gm...> wrote:
>> But I wonder how maxima (not wxMaxima) will display it. Will it be
>>
>> i k
>> x
>> j l
Robert> Yeah, that's what I was thinking.
>> Currently x[2]*y is displayed as
>>
>> x y
>> 2
>>
>> I think it would be hard to distinguish between x * y(pre-subscript
>> 2):
>>
>> x y
>> 2
Robert> I dunno, I'm not too worried about if. If someone doesn't like that,
Robert> they don't need to make the index a pre-subscript ....
That's not always up to me if I want to use some package that does
this.
If we do this, I really think there needs to be a way to make this
less ambiguous. An extra space is just too little to make it clear.
I would hate it, but even adding parens would be better than nothing.
--
Ray
|
|
From: Stavros M. (Σ. Μ. <mac...@al...> - 2015-12-15 19:55:08
|
I'm not sure I understand. With this wxMaxima change, will x_1 and x[1]
display identically? That seems like a bad idea.
-s
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Gunter Königsmann <gu...@pe...>
wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> In the meantime Andrej did some lisp magic that makes wxMaxima display
> x_y as a subscripted variable if y is a integer, only one char long or
> if this has been defined by a rather fain-grained control => We have a
> easy - and quite readable way to input subscripted variables.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Gunter.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2
>
> iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWbxUlXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w
> ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1M0YwNDdDRTY2QjkxQjBGNzI0QzU0NUQ1
> Qzg2QzBFNDIxMUQ1QjhFAAoJEFyGwOQhHVuO4WUQAJ+I8DJgUjVO/hkcBXcZGggU
> CRiy9xO5u4YFTAjVeXoTPtyb39Ji1oW3wVhLh9uP57eAphJlUx4HbPd+5w5sLmUs
> aj453u70/64Lrgm+EZaSyLe48N7Kt4Lo0RpFngaSCDpr7LdS/GyJCCzuB+9Kuzmm
> GlzjcbE+zq1G3ZC1TQHW5u70U11X8Lt3/p/PwYF89yyKm+AF1M1XkelVs3gdBlv6
> v2rfgRdTIurjew6Ox0FT9s2cN/MK6/YrB2SIeh1phO+rZZ+fkTzTlXcPLXcPD/eH
> 58Ja8PD/4IEw+r7tUvfwQPBOkEYMWlg2coKsFXJgF7T25dPym/Fpr2blETpYkJfm
> 0saDMQx4NKLP1GlsPgTaV3iOqZfCl+cqy+XTD9iojMS+sYpkWpx/j4Ta/YinBmv6
> Z5rtlnss9wpcawJyv4R5yAAymZ2se4Uir7tVARV/aL1DJd8dLbmQOiwTPbrIJD9o
> sfYZ/L1aY2ULDuXbYf9Se+mu5EUlR0sGnjKbOzTdBiF4J532EQBe1uU5NLKEtiW3
> B5Kg9u1sTq/3VVOWe1uod+2rRvGeM7NtUQSwQ9rCgWIy1YEPRLuK5BmO4t5E8cmi
> 6D/7X9uX3AS3ISeKrqssoZQJZJGuaRQES0VIeroz3Bjdbqx4WhXa4VgfxCZ+Bvhx
> qJvJOq15xcbndpQHSI9t
> =rYsF
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima-discuss mailing list
> Max...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss
>
|
|
From: Gunter K. <gu...@pe...> - 2015-12-15 20:48:54
|
I quite like this Feature and some of my colleagues already have begun replacing hash arrays by proper subscripts. But Andrej did add a switch that allows to turn it off perhaps knowing that the needs of mathematicians are typically different to the ones of engineers. Kind regards, Gunter. Am 15. Dezember 2015 20:55:01 MEZ, schrieb "Stavros Macrakis (Σταῦρος Μακράκης)" <mac...@al...>: >I'm not sure I understand. With this wxMaxima change, will x_1 and x[1] >display identically? That seems like a bad idea. > > -s > >On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Gunter Königsmann ><gu...@pe...> >wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA512 >> >> In the meantime Andrej did some lisp magic that makes wxMaxima >display >> x_y as a subscripted variable if y is a integer, only one char long >or >> if this has been defined by a rather fain-grained control => We have >a >> easy - and quite readable way to input subscripted variables. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Gunter. >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v2 >> >> iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWbxUlXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w >> ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1M0YwNDdDRTY2QjkxQjBGNzI0QzU0NUQ1 >> Qzg2QzBFNDIxMUQ1QjhFAAoJEFyGwOQhHVuO4WUQAJ+I8DJgUjVO/hkcBXcZGggU >> CRiy9xO5u4YFTAjVeXoTPtyb39Ji1oW3wVhLh9uP57eAphJlUx4HbPd+5w5sLmUs >> aj453u70/64Lrgm+EZaSyLe48N7Kt4Lo0RpFngaSCDpr7LdS/GyJCCzuB+9Kuzmm >> GlzjcbE+zq1G3ZC1TQHW5u70U11X8Lt3/p/PwYF89yyKm+AF1M1XkelVs3gdBlv6 >> v2rfgRdTIurjew6Ox0FT9s2cN/MK6/YrB2SIeh1phO+rZZ+fkTzTlXcPLXcPD/eH >> 58Ja8PD/4IEw+r7tUvfwQPBOkEYMWlg2coKsFXJgF7T25dPym/Fpr2blETpYkJfm >> 0saDMQx4NKLP1GlsPgTaV3iOqZfCl+cqy+XTD9iojMS+sYpkWpx/j4Ta/YinBmv6 >> Z5rtlnss9wpcawJyv4R5yAAymZ2se4Uir7tVARV/aL1DJd8dLbmQOiwTPbrIJD9o >> sfYZ/L1aY2ULDuXbYf9Se+mu5EUlR0sGnjKbOzTdBiF4J532EQBe1uU5NLKEtiW3 >> B5Kg9u1sTq/3VVOWe1uod+2rRvGeM7NtUQSwQ9rCgWIy1YEPRLuK5BmO4t5E8cmi >> 6D/7X9uX3AS3ISeKrqssoZQJZJGuaRQES0VIeroz3Bjdbqx4WhXa4VgfxCZ+Bvhx >> qJvJOq15xcbndpQHSI9t >> =rYsF >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> >> >> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Maxima-discuss mailing list >> Max...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss >> -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet. |
|
From: Stavros M. (Σ. Μ. <mac...@al...> - 2015-12-15 20:56:33
|
I don't understand your emphasis on hash arrays. Maxima subscripts x[i]
denote the i'th element of x, whether x is a list (treated as an
n-dimensional vector), a matrix, a declared array, or a hash array.
-s
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Gunter Königsmann <gu...@pe...>
wrote:
> I quite like this Feature and some of my colleagues already have begun
> replacing hash arrays by proper subscripts. But Andrej did add a switch
> that allows to turn it off perhaps knowing that the needs of mathematicians
> are typically different to the ones of engineers.
>
> Kind regards,
> Gunter.
>
> Am 15. Dezember 2015 20:55:01 MEZ, schrieb "Stavros Macrakis (Σταῦρος
> Μακράκης)" <mac...@al...>:
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand. With this wxMaxima change, will x_1 and x[1]
>> display identically? That seems like a bad idea.
>>
>> -s
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Gunter Königsmann <gu...@pe...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA512
>>>
>>> In the meantime Andrej did some lisp magic that makes wxMaxima display
>>> x_y as a subscripted variable if y is a integer, only one char long or
>>> if this has been defined by a rather fain-grained control => We have a
>>> easy - and quite readable way to input subscripted variables.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Gunter.
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG v2
>>>
>>> iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWbxUlXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w
>>> ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1M0YwNDdDRTY2QjkxQjBGNzI0QzU0NUQ1
>>> Qzg2QzBFNDIxMUQ1QjhFAAoJEFyGwOQhHVuO4WUQAJ+I8DJgUjVO/hkcBXcZGggU
>>> CRiy9xO5u4YFTAjVeXoTPtyb39Ji1oW3wVhLh9uP57eAphJlUx4HbPd+5w5sLmUs
>>> aj453u70/64Lrgm+EZaSyLe48N7Kt4Lo0RpFngaSCDpr7LdS/GyJCCzuB+9Kuzmm
>>> GlzjcbE+zq1G3ZC1TQHW5u70U11X8Lt3/p/PwYF89yyKm+AF1M1XkelVs3gdBlv6
>>> v2rfgRdTIurjew6Ox0FT9s2cN/MK6/YrB2SIeh1phO+rZZ+fkTzTlXcPLXcPD/eH
>>> 58Ja8PD/4IEw+r7tUvfwQPBOkEYMWlg2coKsFXJgF7T25dPym/Fpr2blETpYkJfm
>>> 0saDMQx4NKLP1GlsPgTaV3iOqZfCl+cqy+XTD9iojMS+sYpkWpx/j4Ta/YinBmv6
>>> Z5rtlnss9wpcawJyv4R5yAAymZ2se4Uir7tVARV/aL1DJd8dLbmQOiwTPbrIJD9o
>>> sfYZ/L1aY2ULDuXbYf9Se+mu5EUlR0sGnjKbOzTdBiF4J532EQBe1uU5NLKEtiW3
>>> B5Kg9u1sTq/3VVOWe1uod+2rRvGeM7NtUQSwQ9rCgWIy1YEPRLuK5BmO4t5E8cmi
>>> 6D/7X9uX3AS3ISeKrqssoZQJZJGuaRQES0VIeroz3Bjdbqx4WhXa4VgfxCZ+Bvhx
>>> qJvJOq15xcbndpQHSI9t
>>> =rYsF
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Maxima-discuss mailing list
>>> Max...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss
>>>
>>
>>
> --
> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
>
|
|
From: Gunter K. <gu...@pe...> - 2015-12-16 05:13:54
|
Am 15. Dezember 2015 17:44:58 MEZ, schrieb Martin Marmsoler <mar...@gm...>: > >All the people i know who make heavy use of symbolic >>computation (be it in maxima, maple or mathematica) use the following >>workflow: type the command in a text editor (vi, emacs, etc.) copy >>paste in a console running the computation, modify the command in the >>editor if one is not happy with the result, and iterate. This is the >way >>to get a clean copy of all the steps involved. > >Does there exist an editor which can make autocomplete without >calculating >so I can write the code and then calculate it. But the editor should >show >me when I begin a function the parameters which this function need? > wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command, Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters. >2015-12-14 18:39 GMT+01:00 Leo Butler <l_b...@us...>: > >> "Roland Salz" <ma...@ro...> writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > >> > >> > Mathematical literature makes extensive use of bold characters in >order >> to >> > give semantic value to identifiers, e.g. mark an identifier to be a >> vector >> > or a tensor. >> >> Actually, this is an incorrect statement. As a mathematician, I >would >> characterize the use of boldface font in order to distinguish >"vectors" >> from "scalars" as a crutch used by non-mathematicians (which we >> propagate in teaching non-mathematicians). >> >> > In order to keep formulas readable, every identifier is kept as >> > short as possible, even though loaded with all the information >necessary. >> > Unfortunately, in programming languages 'bold' is not a semantic >value >> but >> > merely a style of presentation. The user of maxima, if he thinks >> > mathematically in bold - non bold categories, has to somehow >translate >> this >> > semantic difference, but he does not find a really satisfying way. >> > Identifiers become longer and formulas less readable. >> >> Unicode has an extended set of characters that let you capture much >of >> this. See the attached screenshot for a sample in Maxima (run inside >> Emacs), using the unicodedate package. >> >> This is orthogonal to your suggestions and the other comments in >this >> thread. >> >> Leo >> >> >> >> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Maxima-discuss mailing list >> Max...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss >> >> > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Maxima-discuss mailing list >Max...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet. |
|
From: Michel T. <ta...@lp...> - 2015-12-16 11:13:18
|
Le 16/12/2015 06:13, Gunter Königsmann a écrit : > wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command, Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters. At least with the version of wxmaxima which come with my LTS version of Ubuntu, these commands do nothing (in fact insert a Tab). I have other problems, for example Ctl-C Ctl-V don't work properly between wxmaxima and other windows, etc. Some menu entries crash the program. I am under the impression that wxmaxima is mainly tested under Microsoft Windows, and probably Mac OS, but free operating systems are second class citizens. To come back to the position of indices, i think it is ill advised to denote x[i] as x_i when i belongs to [0-9] as seems to be the case in this commit to wxmaxima. Indeed the index is frequently a letter and can be either upper or lower (covariant or contravariant). To see typical usage, see for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_formulas_in_Riemannian_geometry If you look for example at the Riemann curvature tensor R, the first index is upper and the three other ones are lower, R^l_{ijk}. This is a property of R and not of ijkl. For example the Ricci tensor is R^l_{ilj} with implied summation on index l which appears both upper and lower (the so called Einstein contraction) so the position cannot be a property of the index, but of the main symbol R. Hence i like much better the proposition of Robert Dodier which describes the position of indices as property of the main symbol. Of course his way of describing this position requires much typing, which i don't like. Some abbreviated form like in the TeX usage would have better chance on concrete use, for example uddd for the R above, one could imagine d|d for one one pre index and one post index, both down, etc. -- Michel Talon |
|
From: Gunter K. <gu...@pe...> - 2015-12-16 17:28:51
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 16.12.2015 12:12, Michel Talon wrote: > Le 16/12/2015 06:13, Gunter Königsmann a écrit : >> wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command, >> Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters. > > At least with the version of wxmaxima which come with my LTS > version of Ubuntu, these commands do nothing (in fact insert a > Tab). I have other problems, for example Ctl-C Ctl-V don't work > properly between wxmaxima and other windows, etc. Some menu > entries crash the program. I am under the impression that wxmaxima > is mainly tested under Microsoft Windows, and probably Mac OS, but > free operating systems are second class citizens. I have to admit that all user-accessible facts seem to indicate that. But I can still assure you that most of the development takes place on linux and a mac computers - and since the same seems to be true for wxWidgets, too, the code in the repository tends to be faster, more stable and more feature-rich for linux than for the other OSes. The reasons why the debian and the ubuntu LTS versions of wxMaxima currently still lack behind by 2 1/2 years are: - - Ubuntu pulls the package from debian twice a year: One time for the LTS version and one time for the more experimental one. The ubuntu release naturally isn't syncronized to the maxima release so there is a chance that a new maxima version will be released shortly after the deadline for ubuntu. But this is the price Ubuntu has to pay in order to make 2 releases a year that only contain software that has been tested for several weeks. - - The guy who packaged wxMaxima for debian marked the package as "orphaned" a few years ago. So After 2013 there haven't been great changes to debian even if Ubuntu still got bugfixes quite fast. - - and debian stable as well as Ubuntu LTS allow security and bug fixes. But they accept changes that draw in new features only if there are very urgent reasons to do so and it is hard to meet their requirements => We are in the strange situation that there might be no possibility to get the newer version into a "stable" revision of Ubuntu or Debian even if (since development was ongoing since the release of "stable") the current package is more stable than the "stable" one. But of course are good news, too: - - Greatly underestimating how much time meeting all the requirements of a seamless integration into the debian system I managed to get nominated as the official debian packager for wxMaxima. And with Vincent Cheng we have a sponsor on the debian side who is of great help every time I need it. - - I was given write access for wxMaxima on ubuntu's Launchpad site so we can provide an automated nightly linux build of wxMaxima (https://launchpad.net/~peterpall/+archive/ubuntu/wxmaxima-nightlies) - - Andrej watches that these nightly builds are rock-solid most of the time. Having said this I have to admit that this week we seem to have introduced a bug that makes error messages from maxima much less meaningful. Can't help much with this since it involves both lisp and maxima's interna. But Andrej is on the case and will resolve the issue. - - And you can either download and install the wxMaxima package from a newer distribution. http://packages.ubuntu.com/wily/math/wxmaxima Should work for you. If it won't the dependency tracking system will hinder you from doing so. > To come back to the position of indices, i think it is ill advised > to denote x[i] as x_i when i belongs to [0-9] as seems to be the > case in this commit to wxmaxima. Indeed the index is frequently a > letter and can be either upper or lower (covariant or > contravariant). This greatly depends on the use case. In physics and electrical engineering R_101, C_22, T_1 and L_993 are typical values for resistors. In mechanical engineering there are many things following the same notation and when crystal structures are analysed I seem to remember the subscript normally is also a number. > Hence i like much better the proposition of Robert Dodier which > describes the position of indices as property of the main symbol. > Of course his way of describing this position requires much > typing, which i don't like. It is a great idea, though: When I started using I[1] as a mechanism for creating something that looks like a subscript I was surprised how much this reduced the readability of my code. I expected using super-and subscripts at the same time to reduce the readability another time. But Robert's approach keeps the code quite readable - even if Richard might have a point that the probability that a student might go such lengths for producing prettier output is definitively less than 100. > Some abbreviated form like in the TeX usage would have better > chance on concrete use, for example uddd for the R above, one > could imagine d|d for one one pre index and one post index, both > down, etc. If we really need and implement superscripts and find a way of avoiding to mix them with exponents (which look like superscripts) on every other occasion having a short notation for using them might be a good idea, too. Kind regards, Gunter. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWcZ8hXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1M0YwNDdDRTY2QjkxQjBGNzI0QzU0NUQ1 Qzg2QzBFNDIxMUQ1QjhFAAoJEFyGwOQhHVuOT0AP/i+vYLePptEskYSYaoCV/LhE 6uvZNLH2OrAFRQb8qqU3YnOj5SvLXUQSPXZYBBNgegUs4r4zffb9OJFT95QqECgu n0EuxcQQ6X8NAqcbq4vYE6V7vMur0jVD1ZSrSB/jsu0x4CeUZmhAo687nDs4AB2o h+iTwqgFFQgdp2C3u/xQMVYKE2yC/wCrYcJkpvxoT6R/0gjYTJ+PZN1MvIchbQZo XB37ANj1kOvWARsWEnbQsl5Yn02KGAnpNbnHBaeXAgwJuUbHQHP2wbC23X0XuFa1 C1DvJ+w2GbQeA+lmZX0YOVO+k8W4C22onW5sKRxNh1raImGbg4/PF94jm5Sq+1w7 x1BolchlvKRfC1W6Rr1ugzDtxxzRUj1HsXL3T6v9BCd+7VfYDSOiG6o3JCCU+aVV o6JdybWZYZWEqewQR8YrDmrMtxk9YGXXMRzai+rDDpUdT5Fpp9AK/1gjaH138LXa XtGaksjBGDt03hY+s8aDBPiPbovyQuCvJ5is8g/AwZuxS0uttkFhnBGDI4l3D/km nJtidjF3UU0VcXZmdL/xN/P2wmvM539F+V+4pGgiNU5vyzWjuJzhF6G0sUTtP+hK KVGst1FMbsMUFjVoZeDROU7lr+bUSz3wdFk8Jg/zI3aLOfCzvZhfWGPRWXPMZp+g k1kH+ig2JkaE8TDUWEsA =lYKw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Martin M. <mar...@gm...> - 2015-12-16 15:46:06
|
In my version it works with ctr+space and ctr+shift+space but thats good it's like in eclipse Am 16.12.2015 12:14 nachm. schrieb "Michel Talon" <ta...@lp...>: > Le 16/12/2015 06:13, Gunter Königsmann a écrit : > > wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command, > Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters. > > At least with the version of wxmaxima which come with my LTS version of > Ubuntu, these commands do nothing (in fact insert a Tab). I have other > problems, for example Ctl-C Ctl-V don't work properly between wxmaxima > and other windows, etc. Some menu entries crash the program. > I am under the impression that wxmaxima is mainly tested under Microsoft > Windows, and probably Mac OS, but free operating systems are second > class citizens. > > To come back to the position of indices, i think it is ill advised to > denote x[i] as x_i when i belongs to [0-9] as seems to be the case in > this commit to wxmaxima. Indeed the index is frequently a letter and can > be either upper or lower (covariant or contravariant). To see typical > usage, see for example: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_formulas_in_Riemannian_geometry > If you look for example at the Riemann curvature tensor R, the first > index is upper and the three other ones are lower, R^l_{ijk}. This is a > property of R and not of ijkl. For example the Ricci tensor is R^l_{ilj} > with implied summation on index l which appears both upper and lower > (the so called Einstein contraction) so the position cannot be a > property of the index, but of the main symbol R. Hence i like much > better the proposition of Robert Dodier which describes the position of > indices as property of the main symbol. Of course his way of describing > this position requires much typing, which i don't like. Some abbreviated > form like in the TeX usage would have better chance on concrete use, for > example uddd for the R above, one could imagine > d|d for one one pre index and one post index, both down, etc. > > > -- > Michel Talon > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Maxima-discuss mailing list > Max...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > |
|
From: Stavros M. (Σ. Μ. <mac...@al...> - 2015-12-16 16:12:49
|
Speaking of things that don't work in a standard way in wxMaxima, on OSX, it is apparently not using the standard text input system, so that means that the usual control operations do not work, but just insert the corresponding non-control character. I wonder if this could be fixed? For example, control-A means "beginning of line", but in wxMaxima, it just inserts the character "A". Similarly for E (end of line), K (kill rest of line), W (kill selected chars), D (delete), etc.https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201236 <http://etc.> On the other hand, the Command commands do work in the usual way (CMD-W = kill selected chars). -s On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Martin Marmsoler < mar...@gm...> wrote: > In my version it works with ctr+space and ctr+shift+space but thats good > it's like in eclipse > Am 16.12.2015 12:14 nachm. schrieb "Michel Talon" <ta...@lp... > >: > >> Le 16/12/2015 06:13, Gunter Königsmann a écrit : >> > wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command, >> Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters. >> >> At least with the version of wxmaxima which come with my LTS version of >> Ubuntu, these commands do nothing (in fact insert a Tab). I have other >> problems, for example Ctl-C Ctl-V don't work properly between wxmaxima >> and other windows, etc. Some menu entries crash the program. >> I am under the impression that wxmaxima is mainly tested under Microsoft >> Windows, and probably Mac OS, but free operating systems are second >> class citizens. >> >> To come back to the position of indices, i think it is ill advised to >> denote x[i] as x_i when i belongs to [0-9] as seems to be the case in >> this commit to wxmaxima. Indeed the index is frequently a letter and can >> be either upper or lower (covariant or contravariant). To see typical >> usage, see for example: >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_formulas_in_Riemannian_geometry >> If you look for example at the Riemann curvature tensor R, the first >> index is upper and the three other ones are lower, R^l_{ijk}. This is a >> property of R and not of ijkl. For example the Ricci tensor is R^l_{ilj} >> with implied summation on index l which appears both upper and lower >> (the so called Einstein contraction) so the position cannot be a >> property of the index, but of the main symbol R. Hence i like much >> better the proposition of Robert Dodier which describes the position of >> indices as property of the main symbol. Of course his way of describing >> this position requires much typing, which i don't like. Some abbreviated >> form like in the TeX usage would have better chance on concrete use, for >> example uddd for the R above, one could imagine >> d|d for one one pre index and one post index, both down, etc. >> >> >> -- >> Michel Talon >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Maxima-discuss mailing list >> Max...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Maxima-discuss mailing list > Max...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > > |
|
From: Gunter K. <gu...@pe...> - 2015-12-16 17:37:48
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 The standard controls don't provide ways to display high-quality 2D maths in a way that works on every OS you could imagine so they were indeed implemented manually. To make things more complicated some standard hotkeys from an english keyboard might not be reachable on a german or a french one and some hotkeys differ from language to language => wxWidgets automatically takes some of the hotkeys from the translations. For mac computers I cannot help too much since I don't own such a thing. But you can file a bug report on wxmaxima.soureforge.net if something is missing. Or (which would be easier for us) file a patch against EditorCell::ProcessEvent in src/EditorCell.cpp that corrects the hotkeys you want. Kind regards, Gunter. On 16.12.2015 17:12, Stavros Macrakis (Σταῦρος Μακράκης) wrote: > Speaking of things that don't work in a standard way in wxMaxima, > on OSX, it is apparently not using the standard text input system, > so that means that the usual control operations do not work, but > just insert the corresponding non-control character. I wonder if > this could be fixed? > > For example, control-A means "beginning of line", but in wxMaxima, > it just inserts the character "A". > > Similarly for E (end of line), K (kill rest of line), W (kill > selected chars), D (delete), > etc.https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201236 <http://etc.> > > On the other hand, the Command commands do work in the usual way > (CMD-W = kill selected chars). > > -s > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Martin Marmsoler > <mar...@gm... <mailto:mar...@gm...>> > wrote: > > In my version it works with ctr+space and ctr+shift+space but > thats good it's like in eclipse > > Am 16.12.2015 12:14 nachm. schrieb "Michel Talon" > <ta...@lp... <mailto:ta...@lp...>>: > > Le 16/12/2015 06:13, Gunter Königsmann a écrit : >> wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command, > Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters. > > At least with the version of wxmaxima which come with my LTS > version of Ubuntu, these commands do nothing (in fact insert a > Tab). I have other problems, for example Ctl-C Ctl-V don't work > properly between wxmaxima and other windows, etc. Some menu entries > crash the program. I am under the impression that wxmaxima is > mainly tested under Microsoft Windows, and probably Mac OS, but > free operating systems are second class citizens. > > To come back to the position of indices, i think it is ill advised > to denote x[i] as x_i when i belongs to [0-9] as seems to be the > case in this commit to wxmaxima. Indeed the index is frequently a > letter and can be either upper or lower (covariant or > contravariant). To see typical usage, see for example: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_formulas_in_Riemannian_geometry > > If you look for example at the Riemann curvature tensor R, the first > index is upper and the three other ones are lower, R^l_{ijk}. This > is a property of R and not of ijkl. For example the Ricci tensor > is R^l_{ilj} with implied summation on index l which appears both > upper and lower (the so called Einstein contraction) so the > position cannot be a property of the index, but of the main symbol > R. Hence i like much better the proposition of Robert Dodier which > describes the position of indices as property of the main symbol. > Of course his way of describing this position requires much typing, > which i don't like. Some abbreviated form like in the TeX usage > would have better chance on concrete use, for example uddd for the > R above, one could imagine d|d for one one pre index and one post > index, both down, etc. > > > -- Michel Talon > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - -------- > > _______________________________________________ > Maxima-discuss mailing list Max...@li... > <mailto:Max...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - -------- > > _______________________________________________ Maxima-discuss > mailing list Max...@li... > <mailto:Max...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - -------- > > > > > _______________________________________________ Maxima-discuss > mailing list Max...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWcaFHXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1M0YwNDdDRTY2QjkxQjBGNzI0QzU0NUQ1 Qzg2QzBFNDIxMUQ1QjhFAAoJEFyGwOQhHVuOslIP/iyPP2ZSQ7rxl6R6BsTUtXFv 9gLFbcZ2Utu1YvAgWBB6x88sZSprF6zHe/0YSQ3tOAHoacZRK/9VgpypOcSP0s5q SO5NY0oMSGEXGYdXutmkFcE/B8rbFgWHjR1CwtAZVlLVMWvkL2kIhBKCLRwA7w9b 7VdT8N64IK30bkRrkIbpVJqML2O/A4shgzi9l3JLuZ91HTYJYtYY5mNVSMEdp30N XWxnSPgbWw12dsfq7n+rtvTqSYwSasuunD2XS/emOQxPjPWoiSRw+Ez8LzbBAUQp v9LSbexCCw6dmd9E2DTLIBjQhztIVvZlYtjgf1Faz4PySuC84SamNx6bFNz/sHjH A8l6LDQH4u3K5iJerpKtyeSWMvoH2dJbXSbg4kpSguQCf/D5/VFyEhn1j4Bbi0ov eoUrqCECq7rezrMwCzErsujy9Vl/4Ynp0BbGBUry761PcHGWASBtYLBWJfOsnytz ILdlrM+Mx67MLmPEecAGhDGyAmgjfcd321K9EFz67DxChElkcQGU1t5AJW6skNv0 T9yeFsoxYr/qqJFNmqvbfZsFhmhD/HIyDrYzlQUNDFbLySseHQEjmXWJi1/iZvu4 chx/gPIs5Rjxn5lApotQafRJ1V43Fv4FuIIdoBXapGoQh1O83dRe1mlwHw+BR6UR Ozt9y7hcjV5jkfcN7fkL =oJrV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
|
From: Richard F. <fa...@be...> - 2015-12-16 16:15:06
|
Just because a notation is in use in paper/pencil applications
does not mean it is ideal or even suitable for automated computation.
For example Leibniz notation for integrals would have us write
integral_sign f(x)dx
but we use integrate(f(x),x)
the notation for differentiation as f'(x), f''(x) or totally
bizarrely d^2f(x)/d^2x or f with dots above,
or d_x{f} etc ..
could also be used,
but we use diff(f(x),x,2)
It works, it isn't too confusing for humans or computers.
The Einstein convention may be handy, and it may have been more-or-less
reasonably implemented in Maxima programs (I don't do relatively for a
living)
but in general it's not necessary to mimick exactly what works for
paper. Humans
are more flexible than that, and a notation that doesn't play well on a
computer
should not be used by (physicists?) to insist that programmers should
hack endlessly on the program. Especially if another, more
suitable (unambiguous in the context of other supported mathematics, say)
is available.
A mathematician of my acquaintance insisted that he couldn't use
Macsyma/Maxima
because the computer terminal I offered him was lacking in keys for
Greek letters.
Well, he was right in that indeed he couldn't use Maxima.
Anyway, I just wanted to point out that the notation of super and
subscripts is already overloaded.
If Maxima is to include 10 different (usually distinct) parts of
mathematics in one unified
system, each of which has some semantics associated with _scripts, there may
not be a system definition that makes it ALL work at the same time in a
universal
context.
RJF
On 12/16/2015 7:45 AM, Martin Marmsoler wrote:
>
> In my version it works with ctr+space and ctr+shift+space but thats
> good it's like in eclipse
>
> Am 16.12.2015 12:14 nachm. schrieb "Michel Talon"
> <ta...@lp... <mailto:ta...@lp...>>:
>
> Le 16/12/2015 06:13, Gunter Königsmann a écrit :
> > wxMaxima has autocompletion: Ctrl+Tab autocompletes a command,
> Shift+Ctrl+Tab shows its parameters.
>
> At least with the version of wxmaxima which come with my LTS
> version of
> Ubuntu, these commands do nothing (in fact insert a Tab). I have other
> problems, for example Ctl-C Ctl-V don't work properly between wxmaxima
> and other windows, etc. Some menu entries crash the program.
> I am under the impression that wxmaxima is mainly tested under
> Microsoft
> Windows, and probably Mac OS, but free operating systems are second
> class citizens.
>
> To come back to the position of indices, i think it is ill advised to
> denote x[i] as x_i when i belongs to [0-9] as seems to be the case in
> this commit to wxmaxima. Indeed the index is frequently a letter
> and can
> be either upper or lower (covariant or contravariant). To see typical
> usage, see for example:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_formulas_in_Riemannian_geometry
> If you look for example at the Riemann curvature tensor R, the first
> index is upper and the three other ones are lower, R^l_{ijk}. This
> is a
> property of R and not of ijkl. For example the Ricci tensor is
> R^l_{ilj}
> with implied summation on index l which appears both upper and lower
> (the so called Einstein contraction) so the position cannot be a
> property of the index, but of the main symbol R. Hence i like much
> better the proposition of Robert Dodier which describes the
> position of
> indices as property of the main symbol. Of course his way of
> describing
> this position requires much typing, which i don't like. Some
> abbreviated
> form like in the TeX usage would have better chance on concrete
> use, for
> example uddd for the R above, one could imagine
> d|d for one one pre index and one post index, both down, etc.
>
>
> --
> Michel Talon
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima-discuss mailing list
> Max...@li...
> <mailto:Max...@li...>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima-discuss mailing list
> Max...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss
|
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X