Hadrian Tang

I think a more consistent syntax with other parts of nerdamer would look like: ``` assume(x>3, (x-3)/(x-3) ) ``` We could simplify all assumptions when possible, so both `not (x>1...

Ideally at least all results from nerdamer.convertToLaTeX should be consumable for nerdamer.convertFromLaTeX.

I think my Maths teacher told me that if limits contained addition or subtraction they must be parenthesized. Therefore, `lim(x+1,x,Infinity)` should be `\lim_{x\to\infty}\left(x+1\right)`.

>Correction: (sqrt(7)+3sqrt(2))(sqrt(7)-3sqrt(2)) gives (-3sqrt(2)+sqrt(7))(3sqrt(2)+sqrt(7)) not 0. Might be a change after I have posted this. I don't know. >I guess some of these can be simplified a bit more but...

>Agreed but who's going to do the updating and verification of accuracy? If this breaks enough tests I can live with the current results. Maybe I will do this myself...

~solve(sqrt(x)+sqrt(2x+1)=5,x) => []~ should=> [4]

~solve(x=2/(3-x),x)~ => [1,1.0000000000000002] (@0.7.13) => [2*(-x+3)^(-1)] (@0.7.14) should=> [1,2]

solveEquations([sqrt(2)a-sqrt(2)c+b+d=0,a+c+sqrt(2)b-sqrt(2)d=0,a+c=0,b+d=1]) => Error: System must contain all linear equations! All four equations are linear, but multivariate.

@jiggzson All of them. Currently solveEquations([a+b=1,a-b=2]) => [a,1.5,b,-0.5]. Therefore, solveEquations([sqrt(2)a-sqrt(2)c+b+d=0,a+c+sqrt(2)b-sqrt(2)d=0,a+c=0,b+d=1]) should=> [a,-1/(2 sqrt(2)), b, 1/2, c, 1/(2 sqrt(2)), d, 1/2]

Also, I think that solveEquations([a+b=1,a-b=2]) should=> [a=1.5,b=-0.5] This is more clear about the connection between the unknown and the value.