Hi!

Is this a bug in if()?

It turns to a real problem e.g. when used in a case like shown in the example.


bug_if.sm (15 KiB) downloaded 63 time(s).

Wrote

Hi!

Is this a bug in if()?

It turns to a real problem e.g. when used in a case like shown in the example

Yes, it is a bug.

if() function doesn't like plotting, solvers, custom functions as in your example, etc.

You have to use cases() for that kind of usages.

Regards

Just to clarify, this is not a fault in the specific function, it works this way because the current architecture of the core doesn't allows a different implementation (thus can't be simply fixed with a change in the function itself).

if(...) currently requires the condition argument to be defined on evaluation, otherwise an error is thrown; this makes the if/else instructions sealed from further evaluations of the preprocessor.

As opposite cases(...) doesn't throw errors on simbolic conditions, but this makes instructions evaluable (thus you shouldn't add any definition in the case() arguments).