MathGroup Archive 2005

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Built-In fuctions redefined---How?

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg62630] Re: Built-In fuctions redefined---How?
  • From: "Jens-Peer Kuska" <kuska at>
  • Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 06:59:22 -0500 (EST)
  • Organization: Uni Leipzig
  • References: <dmh92m$8rj$>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at

for printing you may simply replace
and continue to work with the original expression


"Virgil Stokes" <virgil.stokes at> schrieb 
im Newsbeitrag news:dmh92m$8rj$1 at
| How can I introduce the following definitions:
|    cx for Cos[x]
|  sx for Sin[x]
| where, the argument x, will always be a single 
symbol, and then still be
| able to use the trigonometric identities 
associated with Sin, Cos; e.g.,
|  cx^2 + sx^2 = 1
| Note, this is not  c x (3 symbol expression); 
but,  cx (2 symbol
| expression).
| Why? Because I have some rather large matrices 
with many elements that
| contain expressions in Cos and Sin terms that 
make printing and
| displaying messy and using the MatrixForm can 
give truncation in the
| printed output.
| --V. Stokes

  • Prev by Date: Re: Built-In fuctions redefined---How?
  • Next by Date: Re: Intepolation of an array with missing points
  • Previous by thread: Re: Built-In fuctions redefined---How?
  • Next by thread: Built-In fuctions redefined---How?