Well, searching this site for, say, "premature", using the search box at the top, would give a lot of examples :) It is one of the typical problems that people have.

Alec

The next logical step would be to replace Java interface with the .NET one, having a Classic mode (without 2D-input that makes current Document and Worksheet modes impossible to use.)

Alec

Infinity shouldn't be a problem.

The problem with using f(g) is caused by so called "premature evaluation". Plot command is trying to evaluate it first in the form it is written, and evaluating f(g) with g being an unassigned name, causes the problem. The quotting, or using f without an argument prevents that.

Alec

Infinity shouldn't be a problem.

The problem with using f(g) is caused by so called "premature evaluation". Plot command is trying to evaluate it first in the form it is written, and evaluating f(g) with g being an unassigned name, causes the problem. The quotting, or using f without an argument prevents that.

Alec

The function should be either quotted in the plot command, as 'f'(g), or 'f(g)', or used without an argument,

plot(f,0..1);

Alec

The function should be either quotted in the plot command, as 'f'(g), or 'f(g)', or used without an argument,

plot(f,0..1);

Alec

What plot command are you using? If it works for every single value, it should work in the plot, too. The plot command just evaluates the function in 49 points and then connects the calculated points with segments.

Alec

What plot command are you using? If it works for every single value, it should work in the plot, too. The plot command just evaluates the function in 49 points and then connects the calculated points with segments.

Alec

ln(exp(2*Pi*I));
                                  0
simplify(ln(exp(x)),symbolic);
                                  x
ln(exp(x)) assuming real;
                                  x

Alec

ln(exp(2*Pi*I));
                                  0
simplify(ln(exp(x)),symbolic);
                                  x
ln(exp(x)) assuming real;
                                  x

Alec

If there is not so much to type, why don't you type them here?

Alec

If there is not so much to type, why don't you type them here?

Alec

There is no an isomorpism between them even considered only as abelian groups (with addition) - one of them is cyclic of order 2^n (and 1 in it has order 2^n), and another one is a direct sum of n cyclic groups of order 2 (with all non-identity elements having order 2). Any mapping can be considered as a polynomial function though (in some weird sense :)  It just doesn't have much sense outside of cryptography.

Alec

There is no an isomorpism between them even considered only as abelian groups (with addition) - one of them is cyclic of order 2^n (and 1 in it has order 2^n), and another one is a direct sum of n cyclic groups of order 2 (with all non-identity elements having order 2). Any mapping can be considered as a polynomial function though (in some weird sense :)  It just doesn't have much sense outside of cryptography.

Alec

I think, that happened because of Maplets. They were so nice in Maple 8 (and they still are), that somebody got an idea at that time that using Java for the interface would also be very nice. Anybody with some experience in Java programming (including me), shouted "No, please no". But the management, without such an experience, didn't listen to us.

Alec