Re: [Maxima-discuss] inverse Laplace transform

[Richard F. <fa...@be...>]

On 8/27/2017 3:10 PM, Robert Dodier wrote:
> Given that, it seems
> worth considering to reimplemnt the whole thing via pattern matching
> rules.
Sounds plausible to me
>
> Incidentally I would take the opportunity to press for renaming 'ilt' to
> something more self-explanatory such as 'inverse_laplace'.
The rule of thumb used in Mathematica seems to be to favor
long fully-descriptive names, except for differentiation, which is just D[].
I think that anyone who needs the short name can always define
ilt( ...) := inverse_laplace_transform( ...)

(note that I made the name even longer... )
RJF