I develop optimization software professionally, and I use both Matlab
and Python
extensively.
I only use Matlab for prototyping numerical algorithms and inspecting
and manipulation matrices. I tend to stick with Matlab/Octave because
constructing/inspecting matrices is so simple and the linear alg
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 8/17/11 10:02 PM, Nils Bruin wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, Dan Drake wrote:
>>>
>>> This is now #11699:http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11699
>>>
>>> I agree with Rob; this probably should be in matrix(), and not in the
>>> prep
On Aug 17, 8:02 pm, Nils Bruin wrote:
> The bigger problem is: How do you convert the strings representing
> matrix entries to sage? What is going to be the base ring of the
> matrix? This determines what to use instead of the "eval" above.
Seems this thread *has* been hijacked. ;-)
I believe c
On 8/17/11 10:02 PM, Nils Bruin wrote:
On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, Dan Drake wrote:
This is now #11699:http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11699
I agree with Rob; this probably should be in matrix(), and not in the
preparser.
Are you thinking of having matrix(s) [with s a string] being
equival
On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, Dan Drake wrote:
> This is now #11699:http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11699
>
> I agree with Rob; this probably should be in matrix(), and not in the
> preparser.
Are you thinking of having matrix(s) [with s a string] being
equivalent to
matrix([[eval(a) for a in r.
On Aug 17, 5:45 pm, Dan Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 at 10:36AM -0500, Jason Grout wrote:
> > Note that "matrix" below is the *scipy* matrix command, since -pylab
> > overwrote Sage's matrix command. However, matrix multiplication works
> > naturally below, and the matrix-creating command
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011 at 10:36AM -0500, Jason Grout wrote:
> Note that "matrix" below is the *scipy* matrix command, since -pylab
> overwrote Sage's matrix command. However, matrix multiplication works
> naturally below, and the matrix-creating command uses matlab-like
> syntax.
>
> sage: a=matrix("
On Aug 17, 9:00 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> Another option is to make the preparser recognize syntax like:
>
> [1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7 8 9]
The preparser is evil. ;-)
Seriously, if we are going to preparse a matrix, I should think we
would allow multiline input as a prerequisite.
http://trac.sagemath.or
2011/8/17 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso :
>
> That being said, what is the system identification toolbox? The
> Mathworks makes it look like it's a combination of Simulink with
> something else.
>
There may be connections with Simulink, but on the whole it doesn't
have anything to do with it. The toolbo
On 17 August 2011 03:16, Tim Lahey wrote:
> I think you'd find that most people will run into cases where at
> least one routine they need isn't supported. Now, that's been
> happening with Octave and as such, they've been getting better
> toolbox support, but I know I'd have to improve at least
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
> Hi, John,
>
> On Aug 17, 2011, at 08:22 , John Cremona wrote:
>
>> If I type browse_sage_doc('reference') into the command line (4.7.1,
>> linux) it used to open the documentation in my already-running
>> browser. But now it just dumps ra
* William Stein [2011-08-12 11:30:21 -0700]:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Julian Rüth wrote:
> > I'm not sure if this discussion has been picked up in a different thread
> > since February but the problem with zipimport seems to be that it can't load
> > .so files. Since we have plenty of
Hi, John,
On Aug 17, 2011, at 08:22 , John Cremona wrote:
> If I type browse_sage_doc('reference') into the command line (4.7.1,
> linux) it used to open the documentation in my already-running
> browser. But now it just dumps raw html to the screen, apparently the
> contents of a temp.html file
> I am not an expert in sage development, but I promise I will have a
> careful look to your tickets.
Hi Jose,
sounds good. Looking forward to.
Best regards
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubsc
> Another trick is to review someone else's ticket and then ask them to review
> yours. e.g. kcrisman has reviewed so many of my tickets that I would be
> obliged to review anything he asked me to (assuming I were competent to do so
> of course). Unfortunately, I can't help with probability di
> In the case of this ticket, there were some disagreements as well
> about how to structure things in this module.
Well I'm really sorry about this 'disagreement' which I feel is rather
a misunderstanding. I thought we agreed upon quick release and
postponement of these structural questions.
Besi
On 8/17/11 10:40 AM, Ivo Hedtke wrote:
Am 17.08.2011 um 17:36 schrieb Jason Grout:
One conclusion: we should make Sage's matrix command accept a string like the
above example and parse it as matlab would.
+1
Another option is to make the preparser recognize syntax like:
[1 2 3; 4 5 6; 7
Am 17.08.2011 um 17:36 schrieb Jason Grout:
> One conclusion: we should make Sage's matrix command accept a string like the
> above example and parse it as matlab would.
+1
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
On 8/17/11 7:59 AM, Chris Godsil wrote:
Dima
Thanks for the comments. First I was aware of the eigenspaces()
command. I am also aware that things are
improving all the time. For my actual example I needed an orthonormal
basis for each eigenspace and the
graphs are pretty random, so the eigenvalu
If I type browse_sage_doc('reference') into the command line (4.7.1,
linux) it used to open the documentation in my already-running
browser. But now it just dumps raw html to the screen, apparently the
contents of a temp.html file.
Is something broken in Sage or with me?
John
--
To post to thi
graph eigenspaces (with default settings, maybe they can be tweaked?) are
quite adequate for up to 25-30 vertices, then it get very slow, indeed...
For the kind of computations you have in mind, I prefer using cvxopt (a Sage
package); although it's primarily
for optimization, it has a nice spar
Shouldn't respected sirs rather talk about this on sage-devel?
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sag
I didn't ask the question, but still want to really thank Tim, Chris,
and Jordi for their detailed, thoughtful and incisive comments that
greeted my RSS feed this morning! Very useful and informative.
- kcrisman
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscri
Dima
Thanks for the comments. First I was aware of the eigenspaces()
command. I am also aware that things are
improving all the time. For my actual example I needed an orthonormal
basis for each eigenspace and the
graphs are pretty random, so the eigenvalues are more or less
arbitrary reals.
Seco
On Aug 17, 4:26 am, Ivan Andrus wrote:
> On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:51 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>
> >>> If the owner forgot about the ticket (holidays and stuff), I think it
> >>> is perfectly fine if the author him- or herself asks on one of the
> >>> sage lists (probably sage-devel is a good choice, or
I have received a couple of helpful hints about functional existing
open source packages that treat units in the desired way (ezunits in
maxima and DesignerUnits.com), but I am still after the quick and
dirty way for using the existing units package in sage. The only thing
that really stops me righ
On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:51 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>>> If the owner forgot about the ticket (holidays and stuff), I think it
>>> is perfectly fine if the author him- or herself asks on one of the
>>> sage lists (probably sage-devel is a good choice, or a specialised
>>> list if that exists for the give
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 3:58 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If somebody walked up to *you* and asked: "Is Sage now a viable
> alternative to MATLAB?" what would you say?
> I'm especially interested in what people who do numerical/applied
> computation think.
I'm an engineer and I use MATLAB p
Chris,
On Wednesday, 17 August 2011 11:37:02 UTC+8, Chris Godsil wrote:
[...]
> One big advantage of sage is that one can do numerical calculations
> along with
> computations in algebra or number theory or graph theory...
> For my own work I find myself wanting to do numerical computations on
On 16/08/11 17:01, Rolf wrote:
Sorry,
my mistake. It's here http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11572
I even added some notebooks to test the new capabilities.
http://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/2887
http://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/2886
Waiting for further suggestions.
Best
On 16 Aug., 16:37,
On 16/08/11 17:01, Rolf wrote:
Sorry,
my mistake. It's here http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11572
I even added some notebooks to test the new capabilities.
http://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/2887
http://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/2886
Waiting for further suggestions.
Best
On 16 Aug., 16:37,
31 matches
Mail list logo
