[sage-support] Re: Possible to make implicit multiplication allow (1 + 2) (3 + 4) ?
On Jun 24, 11:59 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
sage: implicit_mul('diff(f,x)(3)', level=10)
'diff(f,x)*(3)'
which is definitely not what I intended.
Jason
Would you agree a good robust solution to your issue would be for an
implicit_mul level that *ONLY* converted spaces to multiplication? In
other words
This should work...
(1 + 2) (3 + 4) # Notice space between parens.
This should/would give an error...
(1 + 2)(3 + 4) # Notice no space between parens.
I reread the implicit_mul docs at
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/sage/misc/preparser.html
and I cannot find a level between 3 and 10 that does this.
cs
--
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
Re: [sage-support] Re: Possible to make implicit multiplication allow (1 + 2) (3 + 4) ?
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Chris Seberino cseber...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 24, 11:59 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
sage: implicit_mul('diff(f,x)(3)', level=10)
'diff(f,x)*(3)'
which is definitely not what I intended.
Jason
Would you agree a good robust solution to your issue would be for an
implicit_mul level that *ONLY* converted spaces to multiplication? In
other words
This should work...
(1 + 2) (3 + 4) # Notice space between parens.
This should/would give an error...
(1 + 2)(3 + 4) # Notice no space between parens.
That doesn't solve the call mangling issue:
sage: f(x) = x+1
sage: g(x) = x^2
sage: var('a,b')
(a, b)
sage: (f) (a)
a + 1
sage: f + g
x |-- x^2 + x + 1
sage: (f + g) (a + b)
(a + b)^2 + a + b + 1
I reread the implicit_mul docs at
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/sage/misc/preparser.html
and I cannot find a level between 3 and 10 that does this.
The levels aren't tight so that we can add levels if needed, however I
think it's a bad idea for the default level to make syntactically
valid Python into something that has a totally different meaning.
- 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 make implicit multiplication allow (1 + 2) (3 + 4) ?
On 6/24/11 2:17 AM, Chris Seberino wrote: I love implicit_multiplication(True) but I noticed it doesn't work between parens!? How make this work?... sage: (1 + 2) (3 + 4) --- TypeError Traceback (most recent call last) /home/seb/ipython console inmodule() TypeError: 'sage.rings.integer.Integer' object is not callable Did you read the docs before you posted? There's a level specifier, and a warning in the docs about making that case work: http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/sage/misc/preparser.html#sage.misc.preparser.implicit_mul 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] Re: Possible to make implicit multiplication allow (1 + 2) (3 + 4) ?
Jason Thanks. Usually I google and read what I find. This one slipped my net. My apologies. I'll try harder to search. I see the may mangle call statements warning on the link you sent. I don't see an example of a mangling. I increased my level to 10 and tried to mangle something but I failed. Still not sure what I should watch out for... sage: n( sin( ( sin( .5 ) ) ) ) 0.461269555033181 sage: n( sin( ( sin( .5 ) cos( sin(.1) ) ) ) ) 0.459150207292798 cs On Jun 24, 7:57 am, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: On 6/24/11 2:17 AM, Chris Seberino wrote: I love implicit_multiplication(True) but I noticed it doesn't work between parens!? How make this work?... sage: (1 + 2) (3 + 4) --- TypeError Traceback (most recent call last) /home/seb/ipython console inmodule() TypeError: 'sage.rings.integer.Integer' object is not callable Did you read the docs before you posted? There's a level specifier, and a warning in the docs about making that case work: http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/sage/misc/preparser.html#sage.m... 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] Re: Possible to make implicit multiplication allow (1 + 2) (3 + 4) ?
On 6/24/11 11:02 PM, Chris Seberino wrote:
Jason
Thanks. Usually I google and read what I find. This one slipped my
net. My apologies. I'll try harder to search.
I see the may mangle call statements warning on the link you sent.
I don't see an example of a mangling.
I increased my level to 10 and tried to mangle something but I
failed. Still not sure what I should watch out for...
sage: n( sin( ( sin( .5 ) ) ) )
0.461269555033181
sage: n( sin( ( sin( .5 ) cos( sin(.1) ) ) ) )
0.459150207292798
The last doctest example gives a situation to watch out for:
sage: implicit_mul('f(a)(b)', level=10)
'f(a)*(b)'
What if f(a) really returned a function, and that returned function was
supposed to be called with b. I do this all the time when taking
derivatives, for example:
f(x)=x^2
diff(f,x)(3) # evaluate the derivative at x=3
This would preparse as:
sage: implicit_mul('diff(f,x)(3)', level=10)
'diff(f,x)*(3)'
which is definitely not what I intended.
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
