On Qua, 2009-03-11 at 18:42 -0400, Kostas Oikonomou wrote:
> I understand. I find this usage, i.e. distinction between
> "f" and "f(x)" opaque and confusing, perhaps because I am
> used to Mathematica, where the same effect is achieved by
> wrapping the function in an "evaluate()" before passing it
> to plot().
How about plot2d('r4(s), [s,200,300]); ?
Is that less confusing?
I sympathize with your complaint in the sense that sin(s), without the
quote, would be interpreted correctly by plot2d but my_own_sin(s) not.
Regards,
Jaime