Re: Vector of args

[Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux.fr>]

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.