Post

Stuart
@sxpmaths.bsky.social

Currently creating a workbook for A2 Differentiation and wondering at what point I'll give up ensuring every 'd' is non-italicised in equations... #lifestooshort

Andrew Stacey
@mathforge.org

That's one I don't agree with. Non-italicised function names are only if they are _proper_ names like sin or log. You everyday common-or-garden f, g, and h should be italicised.

0 reposts0 likes

Graham Cumming
@mathsnot.bsky.social

We may have to disagree then, but I think italicised function names tend to be produced by those who over-use equation editor; exam boards don’t, decent textbooks don’t. Function names aren’t variables so shouldn’t be italicised. Next up, angels dancing on the head of a pin!

Andrew Stacey
@mathforge.org

Function names *are* variables. Just not numerical variables. Functions aren't special mathematical objects. The correct distinction is between constants, like e, π, sin, cos, and other things.

Andrew Stacey
@mathforge.org

This feels a bit like the school-level insistence on using the triple lines for identities instead of talking about equality of *functions*.

Paul Johnson
@ptwiddle.bsky.social

Was going to quote repost this and just reposted by mistake, but I *just* learned about this the last few days talking with my Y10 daughter about her maths class and it took me several minutes of questioning her before I understood what the triple lines were meaning.

Andrew Stacey
@mathforge.org

I'd italicise the f and not the cos. The f is an alias, so is italic. The cos has a universal meaning, so is upright. Exactly as if I wrote x = e, the x is italic and the e is upright.