I haven't seen a definition of the laplacian matrix for looped digraphs,
but sure, okay, I assume this is standard, then? I don't think the
laplacian_matrix function calculates this quantity for digraphs. This
might be a bug, then.
It is standard to take the Laplacian to be D - A where D
davidp wrote:
I haven't seen a definition of the laplacian matrix for looped digraphs,
but sure, okay, I assume this is standard, then? I don't think the
laplacian_matrix function calculates this quantity for digraphs. This
might be a bug, then.
It is standard to take the Laplacian to be
Update:
Rob I just downloaded SAGE 3.4 from that link and got
the correct checksum.
The next week, the newest version of SAGElwlcd will be
realeased including SAGE 3.4.
As said before I appreciate any feedback you can give me
on the past release (comments, etc). The same in case people
you know
Is any of you guys a launchpad member?
I'm not able to contact the Quantities developers, this is the email I sent
to their mailing list, but it has probably been filtered because of not
being a developer. Jason can you forward this to the Quantities developers?
On Mar 21, 1:19 am, Lucio Lastra luciolas...@gmail.com wrote:
As said before I appreciate any feedback you can give me
on the past release (comments, etc). The same in case people
you know wants to try it out.
Hi Lucio,
Several suggestions and comments. I've got a basic idea of what is
Maurizio wrote:
Is any of you guys a launchpad member?
I'm not able to contact the Quantities developers, this is the email I
sent to their mailing list, but it has probably been filtered because of
not being a developer. Jason can you forward this to the Quantities
developers?
As I see there are no specific plot commands for complex functions.
There are 3 types that would be preferable:
1. parametric plot
2. contour plot
3. conformal plot
The parametric plot can be simulated with parametric_plot and the
contour plot with contour_plot.
However for these functions one
I've opened a question on their launchpad project:
https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/python-quantities/+question/64894
I hope you guys share my feelings, so that I've been a good ambassador
Regards
Maurizio
On 21 Mar, 19:28, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
Maurizio wrote:
I agree... but what about magnitude and argument of the complex
number? I find this representation often more useful than real and
imaginary, so I think it's just a matter of the application.
+1 from me
Maurizio
On 21 Mar, 22:28, Henryk Trappmann bo198...@googlemail.com wrote:
As I see there
Maurizio wrote:
I've opened a question on their launchpad project:
https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/python-quantities/+question/64894
I hope you guys share my feelings, so that I've been a good ambassador
Thanks! We're right behind you on trying to see if this would be a good
Henryk Trappmann wrote:
As I see there are no specific plot commands for complex functions.
There are 3 types that would be preferable:
1. parametric plot
2. contour plot
3. conformal plot
The parametric plot can be simulated with parametric_plot and the
contour plot with contour_plot.
On Mar 21, 2009, at 3:31 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Henryk Trappmann wrote:
As I see there are no specific plot commands for complex functions.
There are 3 types that would be preferable:
1. parametric plot
2. contour plot
3. conformal plot
The parametric plot can be simulated with
Is there any reason why plot converts the arguments of a function
allways to float?
This way it is impossible to zoom in, and sometimes there are strange
artifacts, like breaks in otherwise smooth functions.
Why not just take the number domain of the interval borders.
If it is QQ, then give as
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Mike Hansen mhan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
On Mar 20, 12:09 am, Gustav Delius gustav.del...@gmail.com wrote:
I read that Sage was upgraded to using NetworkX v0.99 as of Sage
version 3.3. However onwww.sagenb.org, one still has to use
Henryk Trappmann wrote:
Is there any reason why plot converts the arguments of a function
allways to float?
This way it is impossible to zoom in, and sometimes there are strange
artifacts, like breaks in otherwise smooth functions.
Why not just take the number domain of the interval borders.
Ondrej
Cool. Please post here when you setup all the project infrastructure,
so I can join the mailing list, etc.
Ok, here is a preliminary stuff:
http://code.google.com/p/qsnake/wiki/SPD
and it rocks, it installs on our university cluster and all numpy,
scipy etc. just works:
16 matches
Mail list logo
