[PATCH] A Few (Small) Documentation Fixes



Cross-references good.
Duplication bad, whether across (fibtophi) or within (%ph/tellrat) entries.

That said, we have a much bigger problem with insufficient documentation
and cross-references than we have with too much duplication:

    ? algebraic doesn't mention that it only affects CRE
    ? ratsimp doesn't cross-reference fullratsimp
    ? csc doesn't mention trigsimp (which reduces it to sin)
etc. etc.

            -s


On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>>> "Robert" == Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com> writes:
>
>     Robert> On 2012-11-29, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:
>     >> I read the documentation for %phi for the first time today.  I find
> it
>     >> odd to see examples of fibtophi.  I think I'd like just a note that
>     >> fibtophi exists, and let the user look up fibtophi (a hyperlink?),
>     >> which pretty much duplicates the examples and documentation here.
>  The
>     >> represents a burden on updating documentation if it has to be
> updated
>     >> in two places.  fibtophi should probably also include a hyperlink to
>     >> %phi.
>
>     Robert> I dunno -- I see your point, but the examples seem equally
> relevent to
>     Robert> %phi & fibtophi ....
>
> Yes, but from a maintenance viewpoint, we should strive to remove
> duplication when possible.
>
> It's a judgment call.
>
> Ray
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>