Subject: About Bug 1742275: featurep(false, 'complex)
From: Stavros Macrakis
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 22:28:30 -0400
On 7/14/07, Harald Geyer <Harald.Geyer at gmx.at> wrote:
> I wonder how propertyp(E,P) would look like, but at least it should
> honor the declarations instead of wildly adopting assumptions from
> other parts of maxima.
It certainly shouldn't "wildly" adopt assumptions, but should be
consistent with the rest of Maxima.
> Ideally I'd also like to see some possibility to specify the defaults
> for undeclared symbols and some uniform way to query this information.
> Right now we have the variable "domain", but it isn't used enough.
Agreed about "domain", but probably a big job to fix that.
solve(x^2+1,x) would have 0 solutions, not 2, asin(2.0) would give an
error (or return itself), etc. etc. A lot of work. And I'm not sure
it's even very well-defined what domain:complex/real really means.
-s