Wow, thanks for answering so many questions. On Jun 10, 4:03 am, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote: > MarkyMarcwrote: > > Thanks for the many useful answers in this thread from several people. > > (And thanks for the book on Rubik's Cube, David Joyner ;-) > > > Now, once again please forgive these questions if they're silly. > > Firstly, regarding neatly typesetting text and maths, I've tried the > > funky javascript editor (shift+click blue bar), but I don't thinks > > it's not quite what I'm looking for. Moreover, I haven't found how to > > edit text once it's entered. How is this done? > > Double-click on the text. > >
Ah yes! I guess double-clicking is not an intuitive way of doing it as single clicking highlights the text. Text one highlights is rarely treated as buttons or hyperlinks in GUIs. OK, you can highlight links but it's fiddly. Well, that's my excuse for not figuring that one out ;-) > > > Preferrably I'd like to enter sage/python code in the form of a self- > > documenting program (actually, there's a better term for this, but > > I've forgotten it). > > Literate programming > Brilliant, yes! Some long-forgotten cogs are squealing at the back of my brain. > I'd like to have lots of neatly formatted latex > > > > > commentary accomanying my sage code, ie I want to be able to > > intersperse latex and sage code. I've done this in the past in latex > > (and some programming lanuage) with some extra tools and packages that > > extract and compile code from a latex document, run it, then retrieve > > and typeset the results. > > > I've tried using the latex(.) function. It neatly typsets a maths > > object, but so far I've only combined it with > > text through statements of the form > > print ".... %s.... " % latex(object) > > which doesn't make for nicely typeset text, headings, piecewise- > > defined-equations etc. > > > Typing %latex at the start of a cell makes all of that cell's content > > interpretted and processed as latex markup -- great for the > > commentary, but then I can't switch back to sage commands in the same > > cell. > > > OK, maybe I should be content with starting a new cell if I want to > > switch from latex entry to sage entry. But then, ideally, I could > > still refer to a sage object in a latex cell which would render the > > referred object as tex in the latex cell. Thus, I wouldn't need to > > manually transliterate a rendered sage expression (say) in to latex in > > a latex cell containing commentary of a sage cell. > > > Am I making sense? Is anything like this possible? > > You might check out sagetex > (http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/help/Catalogue/entries/sagetex.html; > updated version athttp://bitbucket.org/ddrake/sagetex/or installed by > doing sage -i sagetex-2.1.1 ) > Sounds like that's what I want, thanks. > It means you are editing a latex document, but you can do all of those > things you mentioned above with sagetex. > > > > > Being the first sage material I read, "Sage for Newbies" appeared to > > be prepared in a manner that is exactly what I'm looking for. In it > > Ted Kosan briefly mentions "speed" and "presentation" "usage > > styles", and that the latter usage style was the one in which the book > > was prepared, but then he leaves the details of "usage styles" > > unexplained and marked only "to be developed". > > > Perhaps if Ted Kosan's source file from which "Sage for Newbies" was > > generated could be made available I could try and pick up the details > > from there? OK. Yes, an OpenOffice file is available. I had the impression that this wasn't the source but was rather the OO doc was generated from some other sage session. I'll look in to it. > > Ted's book was written in OpenOffice. I thought the source file was in > the same directory. That book hasn't been updated in probably several > years; it may or may not reflect the current nature of Sage. I don't know. > > > > > > > Now, on other silly topics: > > I've switched from using sage 3.2 on my machine to using the > > sagenb.org server. It seems the latter has poorer typesetting > > abilities than v3.2, eg often (but not always) renders sqrt(.) as "sqrt > > (...)" rather than using the usual symbol. Why? Is it something I set? > > > Finally, regarding this code: > > -------------------- > > var('X kappa') > > X=sqrt(kappa) > > F=exp(X) > > show(F/F) > > ------------- > > On v3.2 on my machine the answer is shown as "1", but the sagenb.org > > server tells me it's > > e^{2*sqrt(kappa)} as though it were showing F*F. What's going on > > here? > > In the past few weeks, we've switched to a new system for doing > symbolics which is much faster and promises a great future. There are > some patches still going in to better handle the typesetting; these > issues may be associated with the update. > Regarding the code I posted: am I doing something stupid to not get "1" as the answer. I really like the idea of the notebook server, but at the moment it seems that sagenb.org is not typesetting well (which you addressed) and is returning faulty answers. Particularly for the latter reason it's not terribly usable. OK, I'm probably jumping to conclusions in that last sentence... I must be doing something silly in my code. Perhamps there's some semantic nuance I'm unaware of? Thanks, Marc --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
