[Maxima] plot numerical question
l.butler at ed.ac.uk
Thu Mar 12 08:03:41 CDT 2009
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009, Jaime Villate wrote:
< On Qua, 2009-03-11 at 18:42 -0400, Kostas Oikonomou wrote:
< > I understand. I find this usage, i.e. distinction between
< > "f" and "f(x)" opaque and confusing, perhaps because I am
< > used to Mathematica, where the same effect is achieved by
< > wrapping the function in an "evaluate()" before passing it
< > to plot().
< How about plot2d('r4(s), [s,200,300]); ?
< Is that less confusing?
< I sympathize with your complaint in the sense that sin(s), without the
< quote, would be interpreted correctly by plot2d but my_own_sin(s) not.
I must admit that I am confused by this. If you define
f(s) := block([t:bfloat(s)], sin(t));
then shouldn't maxima evaluate f(s) to be sin(bfloat(s))?
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
More information about the Maxima