|
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: function definition
- To: mathgroup at christensen.cybernetics.net
- Subject: Re: function definition
- From: wself at viking.emcmt.edu (Will Self)
- Date: Sun, 23 Oct 94 18:08:48 -0600
Concerning defining functions, Richard Mercer writes:
>y_ is considered to be different than x_. This is useful e.g. if you have
>f[x_Rational]:= and f[y_Integer]:=
>as then you can define different behaviors for different inputs, i.e.
>"overload" the symbol f.
That's not really useful at all. One can accomplish exactly the
same thing with
f[x_Rational]:= and f[x_Integer]:=
So Richard's explanation doesn't explain anything. I'm inclined to
go along with the attitude mainly expressed so far on this question--
it really shouldn't work the way it does. Maybe someone should send
a bug report to Wolfram and see what they reply...
Will Self
Billings, Montana
Prev by Date:
notebooks from MathSource
Next by Date:
Re: function definition
Previous by thread:
Re: function definition
Next by thread:
Re: function definition
|