Implicit multiplication



Hm..

If some parser takes as input n*(n+1) and produces n(n+1), then you should
> not use that parser because somewhere along the way, it is wrong.
>

you're right. But I have to :(
It's more an WYSIWYG editor for math expressions. Often users are
generating inputs like n(n+1) but meaning n*(n+1).
I hoped maxima can help me solve this inadequacy of the input mechanism.
But it seems there is no way on this layer.


> I suspect you are doing something WAY wrong.  If you have a correct
> openmath parser, then it presumably generates some kind of huge openmath
> data   for example,  sin(x) becomes
>
>  <OMOBJ>
>     <OMA>
>       <OMS name="sin" cd="transc1"/>
>       <OMV name="x"/>
>     </OMA>
>   </OMOBJ>
>
> This is quite different from the data that would be generated by  sin * (x).
>
> If the users types the "*" everything is fine.

>
>
> If you want to convert openmath to Maxima, you should NOT do it by converting openmath
> to an ambiguous text string.  You could do it by converting to an unambiguous text string,
> or taking the openmath structure and generating Maxima's internal form.  In  this case it would
> be a lisp expression,  ((%sin) $x). IN my opinion, that would be the right way.
>
> Understood.

>
> While I doubt that English is your first language, I hope you don't mind a correction...
> You seem to like apostrophes too much.  The word " it's " is a contraction for "it is"
> and has nothing to do with possessives, ever.
>
>  You should learn to use "its".  Also "get's" is not a word.
>
>
Thanks in advance.

>