@Carl Love 

Thanks

Maybe understandable for me in a easy example.?
The book examples are less demanding for advanced programming ? 

 @Carl Love 

Thanks

I see a example : folium of Descartes made by a vector function 

@acer 

Thanks

"Taking a list of numeric values L, and producing a list of lists [p,f(p)] for every p in L , is not complicated. In fact it is a quite straightforward and rather basic example of Maple programming".

This formulation makes it clear
Its a principle in teaching: from basic to complicated.    

@acer 

Thanks

Language interpretations are always a issue,that 's a disadvantage, but it is as it is.

Both axes to the very same extent as i can translate it.:

Then the x-axis and y axis are the same. (identical)

@acer 

Thanks

I made a summarize already from the ex set task3 last week :done on different ways 
So i can see what the difference is

These commands are complicated although knowing what they intended to do  

Q := map(p->[p,f(p)], L); #  x-values are evaluated in function f

T := seq(plot(df(p)*(x-p)+f(p), x=p-1..p+1, color=red), p=L); ??

exc_set_2_task_3_alle_uitwerkingen_via_maple_primes_forum.mw

@acer 

Thanks.
The same scaling that first : both axes in your example with view[ ], they starting with  0,1, .. that one i prefer.

@acer 

Thanks

Using fsolve is difficult to use for the two curves, the other two solvers are easier to use
The solver for checking for x has more then one y values is advanced
Inspecting the two curves let show the intersections . 

"If it looks awkward then I'd say that was because it is shoehorned into the books overall awkward use of Arrays to store temprary results."

Is a another store method other then a Array easier in use ?
 

@acer 

I studied the task part(i) and part(ii)
- part(ii) : can follow this, but why [ ] around fsolve, seq ?

     P[i, 3] := [fsolve(P[i, 2], y, maxsols=10)];
  P[i, 4] := [seq( [1+P[i, 1], P[i, 3][1]],
                   j=1..nops(P[i, 3]))];
  P[i, 5] := [seq( eval(ImpDH, [x=P[i, 4][j][1], y=P[i, 4][j][2]]),
                   j=1..nops(P[i, 3]))];
  P[i, 6] := [seq( P[i, 4][j][2] + P[i, 5][j]*(x-P[i, 4][j][1]),
                   j=1..nops(P[i, 3]))];
  P[i, 7] := [seq( plot(P[i, 6][j], x=0..2,

- part(i) : can't follow this : can't imagine that the starting programming students come up with this solution ? 
T is a empty table definition and a while - do  loop
Its about rootfinding
Complicated  
 

@acer 

Thanks 

"The documented default grid option value for implicitplot is [26,26] in Maple 2020. So if you supply it as [25,25] then you are already forcing a coarser starting resolution than is the documented default"

Yes , i noticed that also this default value., so in the plotbuilder it is a easy way to change this value ( or memorize the command )
There'r is no need to chance this.  

As done in a question

ex_set_2_task_7_acc.mw

@Carl Love 

Thanks

Yes,its a old book from 2002 and if a Array filling can easy replaced with a modern command, why not. 
How the code examples  in the book then looks like ?
I did not get earlier the suggestion: better is to stop with the loops for Array filling

I did already some exercises.  
Ex set 2 task 7 can be rewritten with a modern array filling ?

I did again exc set 2 task 2 , two methods.

Ex_set_2_task2_array_vullen_met_operator.mw 

@acer 

Thanks

"ps. It might be just a language and understanding issue, but it seems to me that you are resistant to believing quite of bit of what I offer as advice and commentary. I think that perhaps it's best that I sign off here."

No, that is not the case in contrary.
I really appriciate your work

Well with the grid[25,25] i was only curiuos how to achieve that
Its only a detail and the plot is curve showing well

Interesting is the whole programming.

There are some questions left from from your previous examples how some results excactly are achieved, but that takes time to figure this out for me
It is a sequenze of all solution steps what is needed for understanding: the ideal situation.

Perhaps you are a little bit frustrated to do math on this way with the book exercises ?
It is not a constraint to hold on for filling a array of using fsolve what is done in the book.
A suggestion that i could chance this is in the case for a Array and fsolve (rootfinding) is really helpful to do it on a better way.

@acer 

Thanks

I did something with the Plotbuilder in the worksheet mode
It can be used for code generation too, so for our example with grid [25,25] = 625 points resolution.

Clicking on a plot gives options

ex_set_2_task_7.mw

@acer 
Thanks

Its the right grid area now in your plot , but there no option added for the grid resolution. 

@Carl Love 

Thanks

Yes, i searched in Maple for help and make some progress with the plotbuilder command for worksheet
Now i will try to apply the grid resolution in the implicit plot
The plotbuilder is handy for generating plotcode too.  

Sidenote: Cartesian product,  from René Descartes ( thought has lived here in Amsterdam, there is a house, but open for public? )