@Carl Love 

Thanks

I will look at it

@Carl Love 

Thanks

That awesome power of Maple is is then versatility to program on different ways ?
   

@Carl Love 
Thanks

Yes, too difficult, although it are 2 position vectors ( velocity, accelaration) moving along the Curve and that is rather easy to imagine.
The length of the folium is a lineintegral ?

@Carl Love 

Thanks

I got all sorts of lists , its about list-building with high level commands as i understand it.

@Carl Love 

Thanks

Maybe understandable for me in a easy example.?
The book examples are less demanding for advanced programming ? 

 @Carl Love 

Thanks

I see a example : folium of Descartes made by a vector function 

@acer 

Thanks

"Taking a list of numeric values L, and producing a list of lists [p,f(p)] for every p in L , is not complicated. In fact it is a quite straightforward and rather basic example of Maple programming".

This formulation makes it clear
Its a principle in teaching: from basic to complicated.    

@acer 

Thanks

Language interpretations are always a issue,that 's a disadvantage, but it is as it is.

Both axes to the very same extent as i can translate it.:

Then the x-axis and y axis are the same. (identical)

@acer 

Thanks

I made a summarize already from the ex set task3 last week :done on different ways 
So i can see what the difference is

These commands are complicated although knowing what they intended to do  

Q := map(p->[p,f(p)], L); #  x-values are evaluated in function f

T := seq(plot(df(p)*(x-p)+f(p), x=p-1..p+1, color=red), p=L); ??

exc_set_2_task_3_alle_uitwerkingen_via_maple_primes_forum.mw

@acer 

Thanks.
The same scaling that first : both axes in your example with view[ ], they starting with  0,1, .. that one i prefer.

@acer 

Thanks

Using fsolve is difficult to use for the two curves, the other two solvers are easier to use
The solver for checking for x has more then one y values is advanced
Inspecting the two curves let show the intersections . 

"If it looks awkward then I'd say that was because it is shoehorned into the books overall awkward use of Arrays to store temprary results."

Is a another store method other then a Array easier in use ?
 

@acer 

I studied the task part(i) and part(ii)
- part(ii) : can follow this, but why [ ] around fsolve, seq ?

     P[i, 3] := [fsolve(P[i, 2], y, maxsols=10)];
  P[i, 4] := [seq( [1+P[i, 1], P[i, 3][1]],
                   j=1..nops(P[i, 3]))];
  P[i, 5] := [seq( eval(ImpDH, [x=P[i, 4][j][1], y=P[i, 4][j][2]]),
                   j=1..nops(P[i, 3]))];
  P[i, 6] := [seq( P[i, 4][j][2] + P[i, 5][j]*(x-P[i, 4][j][1]),
                   j=1..nops(P[i, 3]))];
  P[i, 7] := [seq( plot(P[i, 6][j], x=0..2,

- part(i) : can't follow this : can't imagine that the starting programming students come up with this solution ? 
T is a empty table definition and a while - do  loop
Its about rootfinding
Complicated  
 

@acer 

Thanks 

"The documented default grid option value for implicitplot is [26,26] in Maple 2020. So if you supply it as [25,25] then you are already forcing a coarser starting resolution than is the documented default"

Yes , i noticed that also this default value., so in the plotbuilder it is a easy way to change this value ( or memorize the command )
There'r is no need to chance this.  

As done in a question

ex_set_2_task_7_acc.mw

@Carl Love 

Thanks

Yes,its a old book from 2002 and if a Array filling can easy replaced with a modern command, why not. 
How the code examples  in the book then looks like ?
I did not get earlier the suggestion: better is to stop with the loops for Array filling

I did already some exercises.  
Ex set 2 task 7 can be rewritten with a modern array filling ?

I did again exc set 2 task 2 , two methods.

Ex_set_2_task2_array_vullen_met_operator.mw