|Bill Allombert on Mon, 19 Oct 2015 23:24:54 +0200|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Re: Vector of args|
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 10:43:21PM +0200, Loïc Grenié wrote: > On 2015-10-19 at 19:11 GMT+02:00 Bill wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 02:10:06PM +0200, Loïc Grenié wrote: > > > On 2015-10-17 at 23:27 GMT+02:00 Bill Allombert wrote: > > >> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 09:11:51PM +0200, Josef Eschgfaeller wrote: > > >>> Is there a better way to define evalf? > > >>> Want to use f, not "f". > > >> > > >> Please see this report > > >> http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1639 > > >> and the GIT branch bill-call. > > > > > > Wouldn't it be possible to have evalf already included in GP? It > > > does not look too difficult to implement (although I do not understand > > > completely the code). I volunteer if needed. > > > > I think you skipped the paragraph above :) > > > > Sorry. I did not actually skip it, worse: I forgot it... So, what do you think about this proposal ? Cheers, Bill.