> -----Original Message-----
> From: macrakis at gmail.com [mailto:macrakis at gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Stavros Macrakis
> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 3:37 PM
> To: fateman at EECS.Berkeley.EDU
> Cc: maxima at math.utexas.edu
> Subject: Re: [Maxima] constants, simplification, numerical evaluation
>
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Richard Fateman
> <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> > %pi^x+%e^x, numer --> %e^x+3.1415...^x;
> > can anyone explain why this should be?
>
> Richard,
>
> This behavior has been in there since the olden days,
Yes, I know.
> and is
> intentional (but arguably misguided). Summary: if you want uniform
> behavior, set %enumer:true, and you're all set.
OK, but ..
If you want to do
> better than that....
>
<long explanation, more procedure than logical defense, though.. thanks>
I think that an annoying aspect has been that
(3+4*%i)^2, numer doesn't do what you probably want;
compare with rectform(%);
I would like to take the special check for $%pi out of the main program of
the simplifier, the program simplifya...
RJF