On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com>wrote:
> On 11/17/11, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think elliptic_e(x,m) where x is a number (or %pi) should return the
> > messy expression that might be simplified. But I would hate it if
> > elliptic_e(x,m) always simplified to
> > elliptic_e(x-%pi*round(x/%pi),m)+2*round(x/%pi)*elliptic_ec(m) for
> symbolic
> > x and m. When x is a number (or %pi, %gamma, %e, etc.), maxima can do
> > something reasonable.
>
> Of course, we're under no obligation to produce a mess whenever it's
> possible.
> Not simplifying an expression is correct too. But if an expression
> simplifies,
> I hope it simplifies to something correct.
>
> The suggested policy for elliptic_e (simplify when x is a constant) seems
> reasonable, although I have to confess I really know very little about it.
>
> Something which is not really possible today, which seems like it would
> be useful, would be a simplification system in which it's easy to enable
> and disable simplifications (including built-in ones), and to see which
> simplifications are in effect. Then super-messy simplifications could be
> kept on the shelf, but easily enabled by a user who really wants them.
>
> That would be nice to have. It would also, perhaps, unify the huge
collection that we have today of randomly named flags that controls how
expressions are simplified.
Ray