This is the amazing thing about Sage and an attribute of good
software: you don't need to understand every detail in order to use it
productively. And it motivates you to learn more and explore unknown
fields such as mathematics. :)
I just spoke to a Geography professor who said that it would be
I think that you probably miss the point. Most engineers are not
trained in number theory, group theory, advanced algebra, etc. Leaving
these parts out of Sage would potentially make it easier to use. But
then maybe the engineer should use Maxima, or one of those other
systems that either
I don't get it...
how should this make SAGE easier? From my point of view, I don't even
remember anymore (my bad I know) what a ring represent, but this is
not slowing down my SAGE learning, I think.
But what if tomorrow or the day after, I do need those?
I'm sorry, I just don't get the point
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Maurizio maurizio.gran...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't get it...
how should this make SAGE easier? From my point of view, I don't even
remember anymore (my bad I know) what a ring represent, but this is
not slowing down my SAGE learning, I think.
But what if
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Maurizio maurizio.gran...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't get it...
how should this make SAGE easier? From my point of view, I don't even
remember anymore (my bad I know) what a ring represent, but this is
not slowing down my SAGE learning, I think.
But what if
Minh Nguyen wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Maurizio maurizio.gran...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't get it...
how should this make SAGE easier? From my point of view, I don't even
remember anymore (my bad I know) what a ring represent, but this is
not slowing down my SAGE learning, I
Hi Jason,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 3:52 AM, Jason Grout
jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
Minh Nguyen wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Maurizio maurizio.gran...@gmail.com
wrote:
I don't get it...
how should this make SAGE easier? From my point of view, I don't even
remember
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
As regards Scilab and Sage, I think that Ronan Paixão has worked on a
Sage-Scilab interface. From my reading of the Scilab license, I think
it can be legally problematic to include Scilab in Sage, but I'm not a
Minh Nguyen wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
As regards Scilab and Sage, I think that Ronan Paixão has worked on a
Sage-Scilab interface. From my reading of the Scilab license, I think
it can be legally problematic to include Scilab in
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Jaap Spies j.sp...@hccnet.nl wrote:
SNIP
On a note related to the Scilab --- Sage interface, there's an
experimental spkg up on trac. See ticket #4821 at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4821
But the Scilab version for the spkg is a bit outdated.
Minh Nguyen wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Jaap Spies j.sp...@hccnet.nl wrote:
SNIP
On a note related to the Scilab --- Sage interface, there's an
experimental spkg up on trac. See ticket #4821 at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4821
But the Scilab version for the
You all make good points. Certainly more documentation for applied
stuff is called for, and I really like the idea of a configuration
command to avert having to maintain a separate version. Didn't even
think of that!
As regards size, I do think that it would be an important factor. I am
much
On Mar 22, 2009, at 8:23 PM, Hazem wrote:
Thank you all for your feedback.
I agree that maintaining anoher version of Sage is probably spreading
current resources too thin. I was asking to see if this was indeed the
case. On the other hand, an engineering and physics oriented Sage
could
I'm not really familiar with Reduce, and am not a CAS developer. I am
a kind of interested observer and I try to be helpful by collecting
info about existing CAS systems and ideas and submitting links to the
experts - you guys.
Since I am alot more familiar with
Hi Maurizio,
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Maurizio maurizio.gran...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
Honestly, I'm not aware of REDUCE capabilities, but I totally share
Hazem's point of view. Just having a look at that article, I can see
some interest for us to share (for example) the
On Mar 22, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
I don't think that maintaining another version of Sage is the way to
go at the moment, since many developers have enough on their hands and
little time to implement them. What I think is appropriate is to write
a Sage interface to your
Thank you all for your feedback.
I agree that maintaining anoher version of Sage is probably spreading
current resources too thin. I was asking to see if this was indeed the
case. On the other hand, an engineering and physics oriented Sage
could help boost Sage and bring in more resources from
Forgot to add that we would need to include some kind of spreadsheet-
like capability, which is quite useful and convenient when one wants
to create/edit matrices and arrays.
Hazem
On Mar 22, 11:23 pm, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you all for your feedback.
I agree that
Hi Hazem,
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 3:28 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
Forgot to add that we would need to include some kind of spreadsheet-
like capability, which is quite useful and convenient when one wants
to create/edit matrices and arrays.
Yes, there has been discussion about
On Mar 22, 11:48 pm, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Hazem,
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 3:28 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
Forgot to add that we would need to include some kind of spreadsheet-
like capability, which is quite useful and convenient when one wants
to
20 matches
Mail list logo
