Robert Dodier wrote:
> On 7/6/07, Peter Gustafson <petegus at spaceshipone.engin.umich.edu> wrote:
>
>> In my mind, the output of %i4 (and maybe %i3) should read:
>> $$y_1\left(x\right):=m\,x+b$$
>>
>> The output of %i6 should read:
>> $$y_1\left(x\right)=m\,x+b$$
>>
>> Perhaps this is a feature not a bug. Is there a reason the outputs are
>> as they are? Is there a way I can force the behavior that I expect?
>
> Well, the treatment of ":=" is deliberate, although there could well
> be room for improvement. I suppose ":=" is treated specially
> because Maxima functons are typically full of stuff which doesn't
> seem to display well as a formula (if, for, block ...). However
> there certainly are some functions which are appropriately
> displayed as formulas, and there is no way to allow that in the
> current TeX output code.
>
> I've attached a patch to cut out the special case for ":="
> so function definitions are displayed as formulas.
> That's heavy-handed but I don't see a better way to do it
> given the organization of the TeX output code.
>
> About tex('y(x)), that is treated differently than tex(y(x))
> because of Maxima's noun-verb distinction.
> Try tex('(y(x)) (i.e. argument is a verb expression) or
> texput(nounify(y), y_1); tex('y(x)) (i.e. tell Maxima about the
> noun). Dunno if the TeX output code should always treat
> nouns the same as verbs.
>
> HTH
> Robert Dodier
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>
Hi Robert,
Thank you, this is a great help. I will certainly use your
suggestions. As far as what the output code should do, I'm afraid I'll
have to read a bit more about nouns vs verbs in Maxima before I could
offer any opinions.
Thanks again,
Pete Gustafson