On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Raymond Toy (RT/EUS)
<raymond.toy at ericsson.com> wrote:
> These names are ok. But I would suggest that we use Macsyma names, if
> they exist. If not, then perhaps we should follow Mathematica or Maple.
Blechh. When there's some kind of choice about nonfunctional stuff
(e.g. notation or names of functions) Mma & Maple have made all kinds
of questionable choices. Having the same names as them is an extremely
weak reason. I don't see any need to follow Macsyma either.
We should choose names to be clear and descriptive. Whether or not
that coincides with some existing system is a 3rd or 4th order consideration.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news today.
Robert Dodier