Line 3: Line 3:
 
* Not to mention the subtleties of the <math>ugh(x)</math> function.--[[User:Jmason|Jmason]] 09:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 
* Not to mention the subtleties of the <math>ugh(x)</math> function.--[[User:Jmason|Jmason]] 09:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  
*I concur with that.  The <math>ugh(x)</math> should definitely be made into standard LaTeX code.
+
*I concur with that.  The <math>ugh(x)</math> should definitely be made into standard LaTeX code.[[User:Jhunsber|Jhunsber]]

Revision as of 06:10, 7 October 2008

  • I think we should add "Or for those who just can't get enough of the words "nifty", "tricky", and "neat"." :) Jhunsber
  • Not to mention the subtleties of the $ ugh(x) $ function.--Jmason 09:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
  • I concur with that. The $ ugh(x) $ should definitely be made into standard LaTeX code.Jhunsber

Alumni Liaison

Ph.D. on Applied Mathematics in Aug 2007. Involved on applications of image super-resolution to electron microscopy

Francisco Blanco-Silva