Robert Dodier <robert.dodier at gmail.com> writes:
> About recognizing df * f, if there are multiple terms, there are many
> ways of grouping them into f and df (and you'll presumably want to
> omit any terms not dependent on x). I'm sure it's possible to
> enumerate them and cycle through them, but I don't see a way to get
> Maxima to help very much -- as far as I can see, you'll have to do
> most of the work.
I was thinking about this. Could we not extend the pattern matcher to
test the n! possible permutations when someone gives it an operator with
more than two operands. We'd change the "This doesn't work with + or *"
to "This is horrifically slow with + or *", but the result would
probably still be more useful... ?
I haven't thought through the interface carefully: for example, should
the user have to specify the number of operands? David's 1*f example
gives a case where maybe it's not completely obvious how many there are.
Rupert
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/attachments/20130913/a34a57d0/attachment.pgp>;