From: <mve...@li...> - 2017-11-02 15:38:46
|
I understand, in my ignorance, I did not imagine that the internal representation of formulas could affect what is shown to the user. Thank you Marco > Il 2 novembre 2017 alle 16.32 "Stavros Macrakis (Σταῦρος Μακράκης)" <mac...@al...> ha scritto: > > Maxima has a standard canonical order for associative and commutative operations like "+" and "*". Having a standard order is important to its functioning; otherwise it would be difficult for Maxima to simplify (e.g.) x*y-y*x to zero. How exactly the product was created is irrelevant. > > Maxima also supports non-commutative multiplication ("."). For example, if A and B are matrices, it is not in general true that A.B-B.A = 0. > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 8:04 AM, mverpelli--- via Maxima-discuss <max...@li... mailto:max...@li... > wrote: > > > > > > Hello list, > > > > I do not use maxima often and I apologize for the native question. > > > > example: > > (%i1) product(sin(k*x) k,1,3); > > (%o2) sin(x)*sin(2*x)*sin(3*x) > > > > (%i2) product(sin(x/k),k,1,3); > > (%o2) sin(x/3)*sin(x/2)*sin(x) > > > > Why do not I get in the second case: > > > > sin(x)*sin(x/2)*sin(x/3) > > > > I realize it's not a problem, it's more a cosmetic thing but I find it a rather confusing. > > > > Thank you > > > > Marco > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > _______________________________________________ > > Maxima-discuss mailing list > > Max...@li... mailto:Max...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss > > > > > > > > |