a union b (infix operator) to a ∪ b (symbolic infix operator) ...

[compsystems]

Hi BP, the following is just a suggestion, for the purpose of writing documents using GIAC syntax and that the notation is the closest to the real and formal mathematical language, please create aliases or synonyms to

a union b (infix operator) to a ∪ b (symbolic infix operator)
a interseccion b (infix operator) to a ∩ b (symbolic infix operator)
not a (prefix operator) to ¬ a (symbolic prefix operator)
ceil(a) function cmd to ⌈a⌉ (exofix operator)
floor(a) function cmd to ⌊a⌋ (exofix operator)
abs(a) function cmd to |a| (exofix operator)
root(a) function cmd to √(a) to (symbolic function operator) (Done)
integral() function cmd to ∫() (symbolic function operator) (Done)
sum() function cmd to Σ() (symbolic function operator) (Done)
product() function cmd to Π() (symbolic function operator)
a <= b (digraph infix operator) to a ≤ b (real infix operator) (Done)
a >= b (digraph infix operator) to a ≥ b (real infix operator) (Done)
a != b (digraph infix operator) to a ≠ b (real infix operator) (Done)
factorial(a) function cmd to a! (postfix operator) (Done)
a^3 (explicit infix operator) to a³ (implicit infix operator) (Done)
a^2 (explicit infix operator) to a² (implicit infix operator) (Done)
a^1 (explicit infix operator) to a¹ (implicit infix operator)
…

The idea is not to write in latex or similar, but to show the execution syntax of GIAC, in the previous examples there are already mathematical functions that are written as in a maths textbook, Of course, one thing is the formal mathematical notation, another thing is formal computational notation, but, I think it is possible to bring the two worlds closer, again say it and write it takes a few seconds, coding it I think it implies hours of fun and stimulating brain work =) and more as a challenge =] ♣

They are crazy about my brain
Someone thinks the same to me, I am very strange

[parisse]

You mean as input? But how do you get these symbols on a keyboard ??

[compsystems]

As we know the QWERTY keyboard was not designed for the formal sciences: mathematics, logic and computer science, it was designed to write text of natural communication languages, (the QWERTY keyboard is for office secretaries, not for students of many of the disciplines of the knowledge) for this reason we do not find symbols such as ¬, ∫, √, one way of writing special symbols is [alt] + numeric keypad, but it involves memorizing number codes, another is the use of graphs similar to how it is done in the hp48, or the best alternative is a button to display a Unicode character map and be able to copy and paste symbols
http://vimdoc.sourceforge.net/htmldoc/d ... phs-define

[parisse]

I can understand that users want to have support for powers like ³ because that happens if they use the wrong ^ character. But I don't understand why someone would choose a rather complicated input method instead of simply entering union or intersect or whatever command typed in plain ASCII.
And again, please consider that my time ressources are limited before posting something.

[compsystems]

I do not think it is complicated, since using a catalog is simply to be placed in the first part of symbols and insert, in addition the other benefit is to create documents with GIAC syntax that are closest to real math. later when the user has experience he prefers to enter function names instead of symbols.