ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Accepted Solutions
Given the explanation why your function fails in the above post, here are soemwhat awkward workarounds which would either won't show the unit at the end at alll or would require you to know the unit of the result and place the correct inverse function ("unit") there.
I won't advise using Prime but this is sure an advantage of that version that it is able to display complex numbers in polar representation out of the box. But then you won't be able to hide keywords or display symbolic eval and assignment sign as ordinary equal signs.
Unfortunately there is no ALLBUT modifier 😉
This is the best I could come up with:
The < sign in the first expression is a < followed by a space (using ctrl-shift-K). so its a nonexisting function.
As you would have to type the expression you like to evaluate twice I guess thats not worth the effort.
Here is another trick you may try.
The highlighted angle signs are the dummy ones (angle+space).
Given the explanation why your function fails in the above post, here are soemwhat awkward workarounds which would either won't show the unit at the end at alll or would require you to know the unit of the result and place the correct inverse function ("unit") there.
I won't advise using Prime but this is sure an advantage of that version that it is able to display complex numbers in polar representation out of the box. But then you won't be able to hide keywords or display symbolic eval and assignment sign as ordinary equal signs.
Yes, that is what I do. I can show you later when I finish the assignement.
When I make an explicit, mathcad remembers all the 0.097485983745089237598324759837 so when I define with explicit I have to make one more definition with the same name and result below, but now mathcad does not have all those decimals. So all the equations I do onwards will be nice and tidy 
When I make an explicit, mathcad remembers all the 0.097485983745089237598324759837 so when I define with explicit I have to make one more definition with the same name and result below, but now mathcad does not have all those decimals. So all the equations I do onwards will be nice and tidy
I think I don't understand what thats all about.
You can format the output of the symbolics the same way as you can with the numerics (show only n decimals, etc.) You just have to check the box "Apply to symbolic results" in the format pop up window.
If you use the symbolic "float,n" modifier you loose precision in your calculations so this usually is not adviseable.
Its not giving an error if you don't redefine Z.net.maks but it shows that variable in rectangular notation which is not what you want.
The reason is that Mathcad does not only store the value in a variable but also how this value was achieved at last. This is what explicit uses. When you calculate Z.net.maks it is stored in rec form but if you redefine it this definition is stored and displayed by explicit.
At least you can avoid retyping the just calculated value (which is an absolute No-Go and rather failure prone - in your sheet you missed the minus sign for the angle e.g.). I wasn't able to put those calcs in a function and keep in mind that the inline numeric evaluation is vital for those lines to work.
