[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: unexpected behaviour of Sum
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg126573] Re: unexpected behaviour of Sum
*From*: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
*Date*: Sat, 19 May 2012 05:49:01 -0400 (EDT)
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
*References*: <joq5h8$r20$1@smc.vnet.net> <jot5hm$am0$1@smc.vnet.net> <201205180922.FAA17040@smc.vnet.net>
*Reply-to*: murray at math.umass.edu
Send to: suggestions at wolfram.com
On 5/18/12 5:22 AM, perplexed wrote:
> Thanks to everybody.
>
> It is surely true I could write a better definition
> for my functions (sod was just an example),
> but still I do think that this is an imperfection in
> the documentation of Sum.
>
> First of all, this SymbolicSumThreshold option
> is never cited in the documentation of Sum.
>
> In general, there is never a hint to the fact that
> Sum will try to sum symbolically in the case of
> a definite sum. If I did know, I would have considered
> writing a better function.
>
> On the contrary, in the documentation of Sum I read :
>
> "If the range of a sum is finite, i is typically assigned a sequence
> of values,
> with f being evaluated for each one."
>
> and
>
> "If a sum cannot be carried out explicitly by adding up a finite
> number of terms,
> Sum will attempt to find a symbolic result. In this case, f is first
> evaluated symbolically."
>
> With due respect,
> I think that maybe a couple of lines should be added to the
> documentation at least in the "Possible issues" section.
>
>
>
>
--
Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305
Prev by Date:
**Re: export to .m using a cell command**
Next by Date:
**Re: InverseFunction returning working function or just a symbol**
Previous by thread:
**Re: unexpected behaviour of Sum**
Next by thread:
**Re: unexpected behaviour of Sum**
| |