Thanks a lot for that and thanks to Michael for reviewing it! Stan
On Nov 25, 12:30 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The issues were all doctests failing in random other files that use > calculus because the way things printed changed. I've fixed them all > and posted another patch, so please feel free to get an account and > review. (Basically, one looks at the code, applies the patches, and > makes sure everything works as one would expect.) > > - Robert > > On Nov 23, 2008, at 10:43 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote: > > > I was going to ask for a Trac login and find out how to review > > patches, but I just noticed that more qualified people than me have > > taken care of it - and encountered other problems. Pity. Thanks a lot > > for pushing it a bit further! > > > Stan > > > On Nov 20, 11:03 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> On Nov 20, 2008, at 1:54 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote: > > >>> Thanks a lot for that, Robert! > > >> Seehttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4572Doyou want to > >> review it? > > >>> Is the ultimate "fix" the one that will > >>> use pynac instead of maxima? I can't wait for this one. > > >> Yep, though we won't be replacing all of maxima's functionality any > >> time soon. > > >>> All the best, > >>> Stan > > >>> On Nov 19, 6:46 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> On Nov 18, 2008, at 11:18 PM, Stan Schymanski wrote: > > >>>>> Hi Robert, > > >>>>> Will the fix of the interaction with Maxima allow conservation of > >>>>> precision of arguments passed through Maxima? This would > >>>>> satisfy my > >>>>> needs. > > >>>> Actually, the "fix" is avoiding Maxima for everything symbolic. > > >>>>> Depending on how long this is going to take, I would like Mike's > >>>>> interim fix to be implemented. It doesn't make anything worse > >>>>> compared > >>>>> with the current state, as currently latexification gives a false > >>>>> sense > >>>>> of precision, anyway. This does certainly not fit my definition of > >>>>> usefulness. We would just have to make sure that the interim > >>>>> fix is > >>>>> removed again when the maxima interaction is fixed. > > >>>> The problem with Mike's fix is that it affects *all* real numbers, > >>>> not just ones in Maxima expressions. I would be OK with a fix that > >>>> just impacts symbolic object's latex (and even string) > >>>> representation. I'll implement this and see if it gets a positive > >>>> review. > > >>>> - Robert > > >>>>> Robert Bradshaw wrote: > >>>>>> On Nov 18, 2008, at 5:57 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote: > > >>>>>>> Ah, I see: > > >>>>>>> dummy1 = RealField(8)(0.1);dummy1 > >>>>>>> 0.10 > > >>>>>>> dummy2 = RealField(16)(0.1);dummy2 > >>>>>>> 0.1000 > > >>>>>>> latex(x*dummy1) > >>>>>>> {0.1001 x} > > >>>>>>> latex(x*dummy2) > >>>>>>> {0.1 x} > > >>>>>>> This is not quite what one would expect. However, the behaviour > >>>>>>> before > >>>>>>> the fix was not much better in my opinion, as the precision was > >>>>>>> not > >>>>>>> obvious from the latex output, either: > > >>>>>>> sage: dummy1 = RealField(8)(0.1);dummy1 > >>>>>>> 0.10 > >>>>>>> sage: dummy2 = RealField(16)(0.1);dummy2 > >>>>>>> 0.1000 > >>>>>>> sage: latex(x*dummy1) > >>>>>>> {0.100100000000000 x} > >>>>>>> sage: latex(x*dummy2) > >>>>>>> {0.100000000000000 x} > > >>>>>>> Obviously, the fix does not fix all the problems, but it does > >>>>>>> make > >>>>>>> latex output much more useful. Would you agree? > > >>>>>> That depends on your definition of useful. Personally, I think > >>>>>> it's > >>>>>> useful to see how many digits of precision a given number has, > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> for most things it works fine. > > >>>>>> The issue here is the interaction with Maxima, which is being > >>>>>> fixed. > >>>>>> Making it so any latexification of all real numbers is > >>>>>> truncated is > >>>>>> (IMHO) not the right fix because one component abuses precisions. > > >>>>>> - Robert > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
