[sage-support] Re: convertor Sage - TeX - PDF
Dear Wilfried, The tutorial looks great! How did you do the numbered head lines and the index? Is the sage worksheet itself published somewhere? Cheers Stan Wilfried_Huss wrote: On 29 Okt., 12:44, ma...@mendelu.cz ma...@mendelu.cz wrote: Hello all, the conversion into PDF has been discussed several times here. One option is to print into a PDF file. This is another possibility: I wrote for myself a simple converter from Sage worksheets to PDF via PDF LaTeX Great, this is exactly what I need. You can see the outputs in the bulletted list athttp://user.mendelu.cz/marik/sage/ , for examplehttp://user.mendelu.cz/marik/sage/dr.pdf The initial version of the script is athttp://user.mendelu.cz/marik/sage/sage2tex and is neither cleanly written nor clever too much, but still better than get a wire into your eye - as we say in Czech :) For whom is this topic worth Feel free to use it or modify as you need. I have modified the skript a little bit. It now first builds a list of text-, input- and output cells, and then converts each sell to latex. This makes things much easier. I also added syntax highlighting for python, html and latex input cells, and if the output is not a tex formula it is put into a verbatim environment. The HTML-LaTeX conversion is still done by a bunch of regular expressions, so this will need some improvements. But it already works very well. You can find the new version of the script at: http://www.math.tugraz.at/~huss/sage/sws2tex.py And here are example outputs: http://www.math.tugraz.at/~huss/sage/sage_tutorium.pdf http://www.math.tugraz.at/~huss/sage/sws2pdf_test.pdf Would you agree to release your initial script under the GPL or an other Sage compatible licence? I hope this can be improved to a point where it could be included into Sage, for this it needs a proper licence. Cheers, Wilfried Huss --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Matrix inconsistency with decimal/fraction representations
On Nov 1, 5:34 pm, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote: This one had me stumped for a while. I'm using 4.1.1 here, but found the same results in a 4.1.2 notebook. The solve_foo() methods are broken, too; probably as a consequence. # Good sage: m = matrix([ [(-3/10), (1/5), (1/10)], [(1/5), (-2/5), (2/5)], [(1/10), (1/5), (-1/2)] ]) sage: m.echelon_form() [ 1 0 -3/2] [ 0 1 -7/4] [ 0 0 0] # Bad sage: n = matrix([ [-0.3, 0.2, 0.1], [0.2, -0.4, 0.4], [0.1, 0.2, -0.5] ]) sage: n.echelon_form() [ 1.00 0.000 0.000] [0.000 1.00 0.000] [0.000 0.000 1.00] sage: n.det() 1.04083408558608e-17 sage: n.parent() Full MatrixSpace of 3 by 3 dense matrices over Real Field with 53 bits of precision So to the given precision, n is invertible so its echelon form is the identity. But if you convert m to a very high precision RealField: MatrixSpace(RealField(1),3)(m).echelon_form() still gives the identity matrix, so this looks bad. (The determinant is 0 to 10^4 decimals in that example!) # Ugly sage: m == n True I think this is a coercion issue. I agree taht the result is not mathematically nice at all: sage: m==n True sage: m.rank(), n.rank() (2, 3) John Cremona --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: latex issue after upgrading to 4.2
Thanks, that fixed it. I Downloaded the fonts and unpacked them to the ~/.fonts/ directory. On Oct 30, 4:43 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: ma...@mendelu.cz wrote: On 30 říj, 13:30, Flavio Coelho fccoe...@gmail.com wrote: I forgot to mention my platform: Ubuntu Karmic Koala, Firefox 3.5.3 From:http://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/changes.html The linux version of Firefox 3.5 doesn't seem to be able to read the jsMath TeX fonts (probably due to the non-standard encoding), and so new versions have been provided on the font download page for linux users. My hunch is that this is the problem. Especially if you just installed Karmic and thus upgraded to Firefox 3.5. Please replace your jsmath fonts with the special linux Firefix 3.5 fonts found here: http://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/download/jsMath-fonts.html (specifically, install these:http://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/download/TeX-fonts-linux.tgz) Thanks, Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Polynomial approximation of a function
Hello !!! I remember there is an easy way ( through matrices ) to get the best approximation of a function by a polynomial of bounded degree ( and not only the usual approximation by a line ) I looked for such functions in Sage, but found none... Does it mean there is not already in Sage some function to compute it ( it would be a shame !!! ), or just that I once more failed to look for a functio properly ( and that would be a shame, too ) :-) Thank you for your help !!! Nathann --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Polynomial approximation of a function
Nathalie Cohen ha scritto: Hello !!! I remember there is an easy way ( through matrices ) to get the best approximation of a function by a polynomial of bounded degree ( and not only the usual approximation by a line ) Are you speaking about the Taylor expansion ? If so, it is implemented in Sage, but I don't remember the exact names. (searching for Taylor in the documentation) have a good afternoon Laurent --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Ubuntu 9.10
Is the binary for Ubuntu 9.04 also to be used under Ubuntu 9.10 or will a new one be posted? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Ubuntu 9.10
davier2 ha scritto: Is the binary for Ubuntu 9.04 also to be used under Ubuntu 9.10 or will a new one be posted? I'm running Sage 4.2 under Karmic, using the file sage-4.2-linux-Ubuntu_9.04-i686-Linux.tar.gz Seems to work for me. Laurent --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Polynomial approximation of a function
Robert Bradshaw wrote: On Nov 2, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote: Hello !!! I remember there is an easy way ( through matrices ) to get the best approximation of a function by a polynomial of bounded degree ( and not only the usual approximation by a line ) I looked for such functions in Sage, but found none... Does it mean there is not already in Sage some function to compute it ( it would be a shame !!! ), or just that I once more failed to look for a functio properly ( and that would be a shame, too ) Are you thinking of Chebyshev polynomials? I don't think there is, but there might be as part of scipy. I've got (two) implementations of them that I haven't had time to put into Sage proper, but they're pretty straightforward to implement. Sage also includes mpmath, which appears to have appropriate functions: http://mpmath.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/build/calculus/approximation.html Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: numerical integration of bessel_J functions
integration. The problem here is that bessel_J is not a symbolic function, and does not know how to deal with symbolic variables. It would be great if someone submitted a patch to take care of this! Yes, in an ideal world we would have already taken care of this, since this sort of numerical integration cum variables thing really does come up quite often. What would be even greater is if someone who uses functions like this relatively often opened a ticket with all (to their knowledge) functions Sage has that should also have symbolic variants for something like integration, or at least to accept symbolic variables. It would be a lot easier to take care of all of these at once. Unfortunately, it seems that some special functions don't live in Ginac by default (see http://www.ginac.de/tutorial/Built_002din-functions.html#Built_002din-functions). - kcrisman --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Polynomial approximation of a function
Thank you for your answers !! I was thinking about some multidimensional linear approximation, where the basis you use is ( for points of coordinates (x_i, y_i ) ) the vectors The family of x_i, x_i The family of x_i, x_i^2 The family of x_i, x_i^3 The family of x_i, x_i^4 ... But it turns out Scipy was the asnwer Thank you very much :-) Nathann On Nov 2, 7:15 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: Robert Bradshaw wrote: On Nov 2, 2009, at 8:41 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote: Hello !!! I remember there is an easy way ( through matrices ) to get the best approximation of a function by a polynomial of bounded degree ( and not only the usual approximation by a line ) I looked for such functions in Sage, but found none... Does it mean there is not already in Sage some function to compute it ( it would be a shame !!! ), or just that I once more failed to look for a functio properly ( and that would be a shame, too ) Are you thinking of Chebyshev polynomials? I don't think there is, but there might be as part of scipy. I've got (two) implementations of them that I haven't had time to put into Sage proper, but they're pretty straightforward to implement. Sage also includes mpmath, which appears to have appropriate functions: http://mpmath.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/build/calculus/approximati... Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Possible to view cython annotation from command line
Hello, When developing cython code, I find the annotation .html files (showing yellow lines where python calls are, etc.) useful. I can do this from the notebook interface, or (apparently) from command-line usage of cython, but I'm not sure it it is possible to do from the sage command line. it would be nice to when, for example, attaching a .spyx file, have the corresponding .html file generated somewhere when it is compiled. thanks, Justin --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Ubuntu 9.10
OK, I downloaded Sage 4.2 and -testall seemed OK. However, I have a question: if I evaluate pari(7).isprime() in the notebook it returns True, but if I try it from the Sage command line it spawns a longish list of errors - what's up with that? Also, is there a way to invoke it such that it returns 1 or 0 instead of True or False? Thanks...Dave On Nov 2, 9:56 am, Laurent moky.m...@gmail.com wrote: davier2 ha scritto: Is the binary for Ubuntu 9.04 also to be used under Ubuntu 9.10 or will a new one be posted? I'm running Sage 4.2 under Karmic, using the file sage-4.2-linux-Ubuntu_9.04-i686-Linux.tar.gz Seems to work for me. Laurent --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Ubuntu 9.10
On Nov 2, 2009, at 3:22 PM, davedo2 wrote: OK, I downloaded Sage 4.2 and -testall seemed OK. However, I have a question: if I evaluate pari(7).isprime() in the notebook it returns True, but if I try it from the Sage command line it spawns a longish list of errors - what's up with that? Also, is there a way to invoke it such that it returns 1 or 0 instead of True or False? Thanks...Dave How about sage: int(pari(7).isprime()) 1 Though I don't know what the advantage to return 1 or 0 would be. Note that sage: sum(is_prime(n) for n in range(100)) 25 works just fine. BTW, you don't have to invoke pari explicitly here, it's faster to do sage: is_prime(7) True sage: int(is_prime(7)) 1 - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Possible to view cython annotation from command line
On Nov 2, 2009, at 3:10 PM, Justin Domke wrote: Hello, When developing cython code, I find the annotation .html files (showing yellow lines where python calls are, etc.) useful. I can do this from the notebook interface, or (apparently) from command-line usage of cython, but I'm not sure it it is possible to do from the sage command line. it would be nice to when, for example, attaching a .spyx file, have the corresponding .html file generated somewhere when it is compiled. Try running sage -cython -a path/to/script.spyx, and it should generate the .html file for you (that's what the -a option does). - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Possible to view cython annotation from command line
Thanks, that works perfectly! One other question-- is there any way to get .html output when attaching a .spyx file? (Perhaps this is asking a lot...) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Possible to view cython annotation from command line
On Nov 2, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Justin Domke wrote: Thanks, that works perfectly! One other question-- is there any way to get .html output when attaching a .spyx file? (Perhaps this is asking a lot...) No, I don't imagine it would be super hard to do though. - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Ubuntu 9.10
Robert, Thanks for setting me straight on True vs 1. I still wonder though about the first part of my question. Why does pari(7).isprime() work just fine in the notebook, but not from the Sage command line? Thank you for being patient...Dave On Nov 2, 3:48 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Nov 2, 2009, at 3:22 PM, davedo2 wrote: OK, I downloaded Sage 4.2 and -testall seemed OK. However, I have a question: if I evaluate pari(7).isprime() in the notebook it returns True, but if I try it from the Sage command line it spawns a longish list of errors - what's up with that? Also, is there a way to invoke it such that it returns 1 or 0 instead of True or False? Thanks...Dave How about sage: int(pari(7).isprime()) 1 Though I don't know what the advantage to return 1 or 0 would be. Note that sage: sum(is_prime(n) for n in range(100)) 25 works just fine. BTW, you don't have to invoke pari explicitly here, it's faster to do sage: is_prime(7) True sage: int(is_prime(7)) 1 - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Ubuntu 9.10
pari(7).isprime() works fine for me in the sage command line with sage-4.2. What error are you getting? -M. Hampton On Nov 2, 9:03 pm, davedo2 dave...@gmail.com wrote: Robert, Thanks for setting me straight on True vs 1. I still wonder though about the first part of my question. Why does pari(7).isprime() work just fine in the notebook, but not from the Sage command line? Thank you for being patient...Dave --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
