Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login. New Registrations are disabled.

Notification

Icon
Error

Login


Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline mkraska  
#1 Posted : 19 November 2019 12:26:10(UTC)
mkraska


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 15/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,985
Germany

Was thanked: 1124 time(s) in 721 post(s)
SMath can simplify expressions involving index operations, as the example shows. This, however, is limited to expressions with units. It doesn't work for general variables. This also affects the work of Maxima plugin (see bug report), because things like unevaluated linear indexing propagate to Maxima instead of being handled inside SMath Studio.

Is there any reason for disabling this feature? How can I enforce evaluation?
I'd expect the same structure of the results no matter if a or 'm is used. In both cases all expressions are evaluated symbolically.

indexing1.png
indexing1.sm (18kb) downloaded 13 time(s).
Martin Kraska

Pre-configured portable distribution of SMath Studio: https://smath.com/wiki/SMath_with_Plugins.ashx

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your SMath Studio Forum forum account. New Registrations are disabled.

Offline Razonar  
#2 Posted : 19 November 2019 22:10:04(UTC)
Razonar


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 28/08/2014(UTC)
Posts: 1,356
Uruguay

Was thanked: 815 time(s) in 516 post(s)
Originally Posted by: mkraska Go to Quoted Post
SMath can simplify expressions involving index operations, as the example shows. This, however, is limited to expressions with units. It doesn't work for general variables. This also affects the work of Maxima plugin (see bug report), because things like unevaluated linear indexing propagate to Maxima instead of being handled inside SMath Studio.

Is there any reason for disabling this feature? How can I enforce evaluation?
I'd expect the same structure of the results no matter if a or 'm is used. In both cases all expressions are evaluated symbolically.


Hi Martin. I ask the same thing some time ago and the answer was that unevaluated expressions are not assumed as complex values like maple and others, but as general arrays.

You can write your own simplification routine for convert some expression in what you want.

Hope this helps.

indexing1.sm (35kb) downloaded 23 time(s).

Best regards.
Alvaro.
thanks 6 users thanked Razonar for this useful post.
on 19/11/2019(UTC),  on 19/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC)
Offline Jean Giraud  
#3 Posted : 19 November 2019 23:19:56(UTC)
Jean Giraud

Rank: Guest

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 6,866
Canada

Was thanked: 981 time(s) in 809 post(s)
Originally Posted by: mkraska Go to Quoted Post
How can I enforce evaluation?

Martin_2.PNG
Offline mkraska  
#4 Posted : 20 November 2019 11:03:04(UTC)
mkraska


Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 15/04/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,985
Germany

Was thanked: 1124 time(s) in 721 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Razonar Go to Quoted Post


Hi Martin. I ask the same thing some time ago and the answer was that unevaluated expressions are not assumed as complex values like maple and others, but as general arrays.

You can write your own simplification routine for convert some expression in what you want.

Hope this helps.

Best regards.
Alvaro.


Hi Alvaro, your command of equrep() is really impressive and I hope that some of the stuff you designed will make it into SMath core.

As to assuming any undefined variable being an array, this is neither really implemented nor is it useful IMHO.

The following would be wrong if a and b were matrices (or whatever arrays), given that multiplication isn't by element.
multiply.png

Please, dear developers, don't take that as a request to suppress the last bit of symbolic simplification! I'd prefer the scalar assumption, perhaps augmented by some way to mark undefined variables as arrays. Examples would be underline or overarrow, perhaps the number of markers indicating the order (one underline - vector, two underlines - matrix).

I guess that 99% of the users would expect undefined variables to be scalars.



Martin Kraska

Pre-configured portable distribution of SMath Studio: https://smath.com/wiki/SMath_with_Plugins.ashx
thanks 4 users thanked mkraska for this useful post.
on 20/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC),  on 20/11/2019(UTC)
Offline Jean Giraud  
#5 Posted : 20 November 2019 16:26:53(UTC)
Jean Giraud

Rank: Guest

Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC)
Posts: 6,866
Canada

Was thanked: 981 time(s) in 809 post(s)
Originally Posted by: mkraska Go to Quoted Post
I guess that 99% of the users would expect undefined variables to be scalars

For sure 'scalar' for Quick plot [ln(x)],
Thus will support all Smath more scalar maths .

Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.