Re: [Maxima-discuss] def-simplifier and finding the definition

[Raymond T. <toy...@gm...>]

On 10/23/25 9:06 AM, Stavros Macrakis wrote:

> It's great the way def-simplifierstandardizes the definition of 
> simplifying (mathematical) functions.
>
> I use the Tags system in Emacs, so I type META-. /function/to jump to 
> the definition of a function.

That certainly wasn't the intention, but I'm glad there are additional 
benefits.
>
> def-simplifier makes this much more efficient. I used to have to know 
> that the simplifier for gamma is simp-%gamma, for example.
Yeah, and the naming wasn't always consistent.
>
> But unfortunately, the def-simplifierscheme doesn't apply to all 
> functions: it fails for min, floor, matrix, lambda, etc., not to 
> mention operators like +, ^^, etc.
This is probably because these functions have lambda args that aren't 
currently supported. Also, I think some functions use maclisp syntax. We 
should probably replace all of these old-style functions with CL-style. 
A different task, I think.
>
> It would be nice if we could somehow extend the def-simplifier scheme 
> to cover all these cases, even if the call is actually a no-op -- that 
> is, use def-simplifier simply to make the simplifier findable.
>
> (def-simplifier lambda simplambda)   ;; random syntax
> (defun simplambda (x vestigial simp-flag)
A different syntax that I didn't think of. I'll look into it, but part 
of the reason for def-simplifier was to make the bodies also consistent 
so that errors and what not produce consistent results. This kind of 
defeats that purpose.
​