-1 to single-letter functions in the namespace. Also note that RDF(expr) works too, and is marginally to extremely faster, depending on the precision that RR is using.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Hamptonio wrote: > > I agree that RR(expr) works well as an N(expr) replacement. It would > be nice for mathematica migrators to actually have N() defined, > although that does clutter up the namespace more. > > I hadn't realized that mathematica was so unusual in its behavior in > this regard. However, there's another environment that behaves that > way - python itself! If you multiply 1.0*1, the answer is a float. > > -Marshall > > On Jul 10, 1:39 am, Nick Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "Ted Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> In SAGE, I have ended up using the numerical_approx() method as an >>> equivalent to N[] and //N in Mathematica, but I have found it not to >>> be as quick and easy to use. >> >> I use RR(expr) and find it at least as usable as the N[expr] notation >> of Mathematica. >> >> Nick > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
