# Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definition

## glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>30 Apr 2005 10:57:30 -0400

From comp.compilers

Related articles
Determining the inverse function operation from a function definition rlfoster1@cox.net (Ron Foster) (2005-04-26)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit torbenm@diku.dk (2005-04-28)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A. Kazakov) (2005-04-28)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit lfinsto1@gwdg.de (Laurence Finston) (2005-04-28)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit wyrmwif@tsoft.org (SM Ryan) (2005-04-28)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit drdiettrich@compuserve.de (Dr. Diettrich) (2005-04-28)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2005-04-30)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2005-04-30)
Re: Determining the inverse function operation from a function definit drdiettrich@compuserve.de (Dr. Diettrich) (2005-05-13)
| List of all articles for this month |

 From: glen herrmannsfeldt Newsgroups: comp.compilers Date: 30 Apr 2005 10:57:30 -0400 Organization: Compilers Central References: 05-04-067 05-04-092 Keywords: theory Posted-Date: 30 Apr 2005 10:57:30 EDT

Dr. Diettrich wrote:

(snip)

> Things will become a bit more complicated with exponentiation, sine,
> or other non-linear functions, which may require more complex
> transformations.

Well, there are log() and arcsin() for those cases...

> IMO you better ask your questions in a math group. Even if your problem
> is related to "symbol manipulation" or "transformation", it's not a
> matter of compilers nor grammars.

There are two questions. One how to actually do the transformation,
and that should belong to a different group. Mathematica being one of
the more popular symbolic math programs, you might look at that.

The problem of parsing mathematical expressions is still there, and
should still be appropriate here. As one example, operator precedence
still exists in symbolic math.

-- glen

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.