[sage-support] Re: NVIDIA Tesla
Thank you! > http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel/t/df88735e6d4e678c I should search the group before posting. Alec --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: NVIDIA Tesla
On Nov 23, 9:48 pm, "Alec Mihailovs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is it possible to run SAGE on NVIDIA Tesla (with 4 teraflops)? > > http://www.nvidia.com/object/personal_supercomputing.htmlhttp://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/23/068234&from=rss > > Alec Nope, not yet and in the future one would only be able to run a subset of Sage on the GPU anyway. The 4 TFlop number is pretty misleading marketing crap by the way. For more details on Sage and GPUs check out http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel/t/df88735e6d4e678c Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] NVIDIA Tesla
Is it possible to run SAGE on NVIDIA Tesla (with 4 teraflops)? http://www.nvidia.com/object/personal_supercomputing.html http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/11/23/068234&from=rss Alec --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: bug in integral?
On 11/19/08, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yep, these are coming from Maxima: > > (%i11) integrate(x*abs(9-x^2), x, -6, 0); > (%o11) 162 > (%i12) integrate(x*abs(9-x^2), x, -6, -3); > (%o12) -729/4 > (%i13) integrate(x*abs(9-x^2), x, -3, 0); > (%o13) -81/4 > > I've CC'd Robert Dodier on this. For future reference, please forward such reports directly to the Maxima mailing list, or, better still, make a bug report and then forward the bug report to the mailing list. If there is no bug report for this problem yet, I hope someone will make one. Thanks for your help. Robert Dodier --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: [sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | > "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > | Martin Rubey wrote:
> | > | > By the way, I think that "axiom.someop" should become "fricas.someop"
> in SAGE.
> | > | > "axiom" is (meanwhile) quite misleading, FriCAS and axiom have parted.
> | > |
> | > | Could the people involved in Sage/Fricas/Axiom vote on this? If they
> vote for
> | > | the change, somebody can post a patch on the sage trac, and it'll get
> accepted.
> | > | I'm thinking of you, Waldek, Bill Page, etc. and say if the majority
> | > | vote for this
> | > | switch then we do it. I'm generally for it, since the Sage interface
> is being
> | > | developed with FriCAS (rather than Axiom) as the standard test
> interface.
> | >
> | > Just as three projects have agreed to using distinct driver names, it
> | > would make sense for Sage to use distinct interface names too.
> | >
> | > -- Gaby
> | >
> |
> | Are you suggesting that sage have three separate interfaces:
> |
> | sage: axiom.eval('2+2')
> | 4
> | sage: open_axiom.eval('2+2')
> | 4
> | sage: fricas.eval('2+2')
> |
> | William
>
> I'm suggesting that since the three software can coexist on a single
> filesystem and as standalone binaries, it makes the most sense that
> Sage's interface does also make room for them to coexist in a Sage
> session as you show above -- would a user elect to install Sage
> optional packages for all three. [ This, of course, does not mean
> that the Sage people have to implement all three. ]
Thanks for the clarification. Let me re-ask my question.
Would you like to change so that the default PanAxiom interface
in Sage, which is currently called "axiom" be instead called "fricas",
since it is currently being developed by Fricas developers, and
may end up using special features of Fricas?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
William
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: [sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Martin Rubey wrote:
> | > By the way, I think that "axiom.someop" should become "fricas.someop" in
> SAGE.
> | > "axiom" is (meanwhile) quite misleading, FriCAS and axiom have parted.
> |
> | Could the people involved in Sage/Fricas/Axiom vote on this? If they vote
> for
> | the change, somebody can post a patch on the sage trac, and it'll get
> accepted.
> | I'm thinking of you, Waldek, Bill Page, etc. and say if the majority
> | vote for this
> | switch then we do it. I'm generally for it, since the Sage interface is
> being
> | developed with FriCAS (rather than Axiom) as the standard test interface.
>
> Just as three projects have agreed to using distinct driver names, it
> would make sense for Sage to use distinct interface names too.
>
> -- Gaby
>
Are you suggesting that sage have three separate interfaces:
sage: axiom.eval('2+2')
4
sage: open_axiom.eval('2+2')
4
sage: fricas.eval('2+2')
William
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: creating a patch
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Chris Gorecki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've created some files I would like to post as a patch but after > runngin > > hg_sage.add([filenames]) > hg_sage.commit([filenames]) > hg_sage.export() Do hg_sage.log() to see the log and changset numbers. Then do hg_sage.export(changeset_number) to export just that changeset. > > the patch created starts with > > """ > # HG changeset patch > # User [EMAIL PROTECTED] > # Date 1139693613 0 > # Node ID bf5417bc8931e32cb9ed13663c71bff75b4b6b75 > # Parent 039f6310c6fe66477338a91a327b4ad2fd55a5b1 > [project @ patch to sage-0.10.13] > > diff -r 039f6310c6fe -r bf5417bc8931 PKG-INFO > --- a/PKG-INFO Sat Feb 11 01:13:08 2006 + > +++ b/PKG-INFO Sat Feb 11 21:33:33 2006 + > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > Metadata-Version: 1.0 > Name: sage > -Version: 0.10.12 > +Version: 0.10.13 > Summary: SAGE: System for Algebra and Geometry Experimentation > Home-page: http://modular.ucsd.edu/sage > Author: William Stein > """ > > and contains none of the files added. I've tried reinstalling sage > etc., but yet to no avail. > > Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong? > > I'm running sage 3.1.4 on vmware if that helps. > > -Chris > > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] creating a patch
I've created some files I would like to post as a patch but after runngin hg_sage.add([filenames]) hg_sage.commit([filenames]) hg_sage.export() the patch created starts with """ # HG changeset patch # User [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Date 1139693613 0 # Node ID bf5417bc8931e32cb9ed13663c71bff75b4b6b75 # Parent 039f6310c6fe66477338a91a327b4ad2fd55a5b1 [project @ patch to sage-0.10.13] diff -r 039f6310c6fe -r bf5417bc8931 PKG-INFO --- a/PKG-INFO Sat Feb 11 01:13:08 2006 + +++ b/PKG-INFO Sat Feb 11 21:33:33 2006 + @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ Metadata-Version: 1.0 Name: sage -Version: 0.10.12 +Version: 0.10.13 Summary: SAGE: System for Algebra and Geometry Experimentation Home-page: http://modular.ucsd.edu/sage Author: William Stein """ and contains none of the files added. I've tried reinstalling sage etc., but yet to no avail. Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong? I'm running sage 3.1.4 on vmware if that helps. -Chris --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Font size with notebook and Firefox, OS/X
On my system Typeset is smaller than jsmath(expression). The jsmath scaling helps. My only issue is that the fonts are smaller for some expressions, e.g. 3/2 is a lot smaller than just 3. Thanks. On Nov 22, 6:22 pm, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > datajerk wrote: > > Is there away to adjust the Typeset fontsize? It's a bit small with > > Firefox and OS/X. Clearly I can increase all the fonts, but would > > prefer to only change the Typeset output font size. The size used by > > jsmath is about right. > > The Typeset checkbox just uses the normal jsmath. To increase the > jsmath font scaling, click on the jsmath box (in the lower right > corner), click on Options, then change the scale size (at the top of the > resulting box). > > Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
Martin Rubey wrote: > By the way, I think that "axiom.someop" should become "fricas.someop" in SAGE. > "axiom" is (meanwhile) quite misleading, FriCAS and axiom have parted. Could the people involved in Sage/Fricas/Axiom vote on this? If they vote for the change, somebody can post a patch on the sage trac, and it'll get accepted. I'm thinking of you, Waldek, Bill Page, etc. and say if the majority vote for this switch then we do it. I'm generally for it, since the Sage interface is being developed with FriCAS (rather than Axiom) as the standard test interface. William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: latex output for real numbers without zeros at the end
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/4572Do you 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)
> > {0.1001000 x}
> > sage: latex(x*dummy2)
> > {0.100 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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: symbolic integration
On Nov 23, 2008, at 6:01 AM, Paul Zimmermann wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, I know little about symbolic
>> integration techniques. Does anybody have suggestions for references?
>
> there are basically two techniques for symbolic integration:
> 1) table lookup in some classes of integrals. Maple is quite good at
> this.
> 2) recognition of some inputs that (may) admit an integral in a
> given class,
> and computation of that integral by an algorithm. Axiom is quite
> good at
> this.
>
> For 2), a good reference for the transcendental case is the
> following book:
>
> @Book{Bronstein97,
> author = "Manuel Bronstein",
> title = "Symbolic Integration {I}. Transcendental Functions",
> publisher = "Springer",
> year =1997,
> volume = 1,
> series = "Algorithms and Computation in Mathematics"
> }
>
> Unfortunately Manuel Bronstein died before finishing vol. II on the
> algebraic
> case, which is the difficult one. As far as I know, he did implement
> his
> algorithms in Axiom, including (partly) the algebraic case.
>
Thanks. It looks like my library has both regular and electronic
versions so I'll
take a look. The first case might be easier now with the new symbolics
and the pattern matching it has. It seems like looking at FriCAS is a
good idea too.
Cheers,
Tim.
---
Tim Lahey
PhD Candidate, Systems Design Engineering
University of Waterloo
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
"William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Axiom? Axiom does *elementary* integration. That is, if the Risch algorithm applies, it will find the result except in a few cases. It does have some pattern matching abilities, but these are not really worth mentioning. FriCAS (axiom fork, which is the one used for Sage) fixes quite a few bugs in the old axiom integrator. We (FriCASers) are lucky to have Waldek as maintainer, who knows integration fairly well. I'd like to add that I'm working on a domain (in the FriCAS sense) that implements "power series that satisfy an ADE", and these are closed under integration, too. Of course, in most cases, the result will be an ADE, not an elementary function. Below is a rudimentary example "on foot". By the way, I think that "axiom.someop" should become "fricas.someop" in SAGE. "axiom" is (meanwhile) quite misleading, FriCAS and axiom have parted. Martin Below, how to integrate "sum n^n/factorial n z^n" on foot: (1) -> series([n^n/factorial n for n in 0..])$UTS(FRAC INT, x, 0) (1) 2 9 3 32 4 625 5 324 6 117649 7 131072 8 1 + x + 2x + - x + -- x + --- x + --- x + -- x + -- x 2 3 24 5 720 315 + 4782969 9 1562500 10 11 --- x + --- x + O(x ) 4480 567 Type: UnivariateTaylorSeries(Fraction(Integer),x,0) (2) -> l := [1,1,2,9/2,32/3,625/24,324/5]; Type: List(Fraction(Integer)) (3) -> guessADE l (3) n , 3 2 [[function= [[x ]f(x): - xf (x) + f(x) - f(x) = 0,f(0)= 1(0)!],order= 0]] Type: List(Record(function: Expression(Integer),order: NonNegativeInteger)) (4) -> integrate series([n^n/factorial n for n in 0..])$UTS(FRAC INT, x, 0) (4) 1 2 2 3 9 4 32 5 625 6 324 7 117649 8 131072 9 x + - x + - x + - x + -- x + --- x + --- x + -- x + -- x 2 3 8 15 144 35 57602835 + 4782969 10 11 --- x + O(x ) 44800 Type: UnivariateTaylorSeries(Fraction(Integer),x,0) (5) -> guessADE entries complete first(coefficients %, 10) (5) [ n, [function= [[x ]f(x): (- f(x) - x + 1)f (x) + f(x) - 1= 0,f(0)= 0(0)!], order= 0] ] Type: List(Record(function: Expression(Integer),order: NonNegativeInteger)) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
On Nov 23, 8:34 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I would like to see happen soon is some of the basic cases > solved in our own code, and then passing off to some other library > for the harder cases. here is a blogposting about some of the difficulties: http://blog.wolfram.com/2008/01/19/mathematica-and-the-fundamental-theorem-of-calculus/ i.e. it implies that even the test suite has to be intelligent, because different answers could be the same and ok or otoh the same answer could be a problem at some points, when calculating the definite value h --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Plot in spherical coordinates.
I don't understand your question exactly. Is this a paramateric plot in x,y,z space you want to plot? For example, do you want to plot something like an ellipsoid? On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 5:40 AM, A.Z. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I want to plot a function in spherical coordinates (rho, phi, theta), > but i haven't found any examples in tutorial or reference manual. So, > how can i do it in sage? > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] symbolic integration
> Unfortunately, I know little about symbolic
> integration techniques. Does anybody have suggestions for references?
there are basically two techniques for symbolic integration:
1) table lookup in some classes of integrals. Maple is quite good at this.
2) recognition of some inputs that (may) admit an integral in a given class,
and computation of that integral by an algorithm. Axiom is quite good at
this.
For 2), a good reference for the transcendental case is the following book:
@Book{Bronstein97,
author = "Manuel Bronstein",
title ="Symbolic Integration {I}. Transcendental Functions",
publisher ="Springer",
year = 1997,
volume = 1,
series = "Algorithms and Computation in Mathematics"
}
Unfortunately Manuel Bronstein died before finishing vol. II on the algebraic
case, which is the difficult one. As far as I know, he did implement his
algorithms in Axiom, including (partly) the algebraic case.
Implementing symbolic integration from scratch is a major task, that would
require years before reaching what Axiom can do. In any case, I suggest
reusing the Axiom test suite as starting point.
Paul Zimmermann
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Plot in spherical coordinates.
I want to plot a function in spherical coordinates (rho, phi, theta), but i haven't found any examples in tutorial or reference manual. So, how can i do it in sage? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:39 AM, William Stein wrote: > >> >> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> As for the option to use Maple/Mathematica, I think as long as there >>> is relatively good conversion of expressions, it's best to just let >>> the user call the Maple/Mathematica command directly. Otherwise, you >>> need to write code to detect if one is installed and call it with >>> a fallback plan if they're not. >> >> I don't envision any autodetection or anything like that. What I >> envision >> is that the integrate command has an option algorithm='maple', say, >> that >> does the integral transparently using maple, e.g., >> >> sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x) >> (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 >> sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='maple') >> (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 >> sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='mathematica') >> (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 >> sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='sympy') >> (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 >> sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='axiom') >> (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 >> > > Ah, I like that option. To be honest, I haven't even really tried > Maple from > Sage yet. To be honest, one of the reasons I want to switch to Sage > for is > the LaTeX export. Maple's is awful and talking to the developers, they > have > no interest in improving it. I've been contemplating the possibility of > exporting the notebook to LaTeX, but that requires that I get more > familiar > with the notebook code. That has been on my todo list forever, repeatedly. I gave it also as a student project once, but the student turned out to not know programming. > The code in, > > http://www.iwriteiam.nl/html2tex.html > > may be useful as a starting point. It's GPL so that's good. > > Cheers, > > Tim. > > --- > Tim Lahey > PhD Candidate, Systems Design Engineering > University of Waterloo > > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
On Nov 23, 2008, at 3:39 AM, William Stein wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> As for the option to use Maple/Mathematica, I think as long as there >> is relatively good conversion of expressions, it's best to just let >> the user call the Maple/Mathematica command directly. Otherwise, you >> need to write code to detect if one is installed and call it with >> a fallback plan if they're not. > > I don't envision any autodetection or anything like that. What I > envision > is that the integrate command has an option algorithm='maple', say, > that > does the integral transparently using maple, e.g., > > sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x) > (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 > sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='maple') > (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 > sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='mathematica') > (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 > sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='sympy') > (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 > sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='axiom') > (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 > Ah, I like that option. To be honest, I haven't even really tried Maple from Sage yet. To be honest, one of the reasons I want to switch to Sage for is the LaTeX export. Maple's is awful and talking to the developers, they have no interest in improving it. I've been contemplating the possibility of exporting the notebook to LaTeX, but that requires that I get more familiar with the notebook code. The code in, http://www.iwriteiam.nl/html2tex.html may be useful as a starting point. It's GPL so that's good. Cheers, Tim. --- Tim Lahey PhD Candidate, Systems Design Engineering University of Waterloo --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Quitting sage
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 10:56 PM, Tim Lahey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As for the option to use Maple/Mathematica, I think as long as there > is relatively good conversion of expressions, it's best to just let > the user call the Maple/Mathematica command directly. Otherwise, you > need to write code to detect if one is installed and call it with > a fallback plan if they're not. I don't envision any autodetection or anything like that. What I envision is that the integrate command has an option algorithm='maple', say, that does the integral transparently using maple, e.g., sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x) (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='maple') (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='mathematica') (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='sympy') (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 sage: integrate(sin(x)*cos(x)*x, algorithm='axiom') (sin(2*x) - 2*x*cos(2*x))/8 - William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
