If you can come up with a consistent set of rules for ordering objects in a
sum, then you can rewrite the program "great" to your own specifications.
Note that if a << b where << means "less complicated", and you want a+b
Then since 3 << a we would see 3+a. Maybe not what you want.
Note that (x+a)*(x+b) is convention, but my guess is your convention would
require
a+x
Not x+a.
You can have different ordering conventions "near the front of the alphabet
where letters mean constants"
And "near the back of the alphabet where letters mean variables".
Oh,
Since the "great" program is use very often, it must be efficient.
And should be absolutely foolproof. That is, X<<Y and Y<<X must never
both be true.
This, and other issues are raised in a 1971 paper by Joel Moses on
simplification.
Good luck :)
RJF
> -----Original Message-----
> From: maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu
> [mailto:maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu] On Behalf Of van Nek
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 10:10 AM
> To: Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> Subject: a+b vs. b+a
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> (%i1) [ a+b, x+y, x1+x2, etc ];
> (%o1) [b + a, y + x, x2 + x1, etc]
>
> this is the default, which I believe for Maxima beginners is
> confusing.
> Is it possible to have a+b => a+b as the default (without
> calling ordergreat)?
>
> Volker van Nek
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>