Re: .m packages "fullforms" subscripts?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg76844] Re: .m packages "fullforms" subscripts?
- From: Will Robertson <wspr81 at gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 01:08:04 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <email@example.com>
Hi John, Thanks for your reply. On May 26, 6:09 pm, John Fultz <jfu... at wolfram.com> wrote: > On Fri, 25 May 2007 06:44:58 -0400 (EDT), Will Robertson wrote: > > When I save a .m package that includes variables with literal on- > > screen subscripts, they are converted to their FullForm when I re-open > > the file. Is this intended? > > Yes, it is. A goal of the FE package editor is to make the package file highly > readable not only in the front end, but also in Workbench or in a text editor. That's unfortunate, then, since no warning is given. If the package editor is going to degrade my input, I wouldn't mind being told about it in advance... in fact, if it's not an accepted method of inputting data, then it shouldn't be allowed in the first place! In an ideal world, "Control-" should insert "Subscript[,]" instead. > > When subscripted variables are arguments > > to other functions, this does not happen. > > I don't quite understand the last sentence of your email, though, so I can't > respond to that. My original statement was overly broad, now that I've looked into it. I can't paste in a literal example, of course, but the "subscript decomposition" doesn't occur inside a summation with limits that has a subscripted variable as an argument: \!\( \*UnderoverscriptBox[\(\[Sum]\), \(k = 1\), \(2\)] \*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(1\)]\) Hope that helps, Cheers, Will