On Sep 17, 12:31 am, Jason Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 16, 11:45 pm, Jason Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Can I ever get sage to print something like
>
> > sage: (x - x).some_devious_trick()
> > x - x
>
> Just wanted to develop this idea a little further. Right now, pret
Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Sep 16, 11:45 pm, Jason Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Can I ever get sage to print something like
>>
>> sage: (x - x).some_devious_trick()
>> x - x
>>
>> If there is a way to do this, or if there could be a way to do this
>> that wouldn't foul everything up, then
On Sep 16, 11:45 pm, Jason Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can I ever get sage to print something like
>
> sage: (x - x).some_devious_trick()
> x - x
>
> If there is a way to do this, or if there could be a way to do this
> that wouldn't foul everything up, then extending it to operations lik
Jason Merrill wrote:
> This is http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3717. Feeling
> motivated to fix it?
Ah, yes. Thanks for pointing out the trac ticket; I remember the
request now. I've spent a bit of time today looking at this, but became
convinced that it was a little harder than
Hi Jason,
> So until hit with an explicit simplify command, symbolic expressions
> seem retain at least some information about how they were input. Is
> there a way to get the input form of an expression back out? Can I
> ever get sage to print something like
>
> sage: (x - x).some_devious_tric
The documentation for simplify explains:
Expressions always print simplified; a simplified expression is
distinguished because the way it prints agrees with its underlyilng
representation.
sage: x - x
0
sage: type(x - x)
sage: type(simplify(x - x))
So until hit with an explicit simplify comma
This is http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3717. Feeling
motivated to fix it?
JM
On Sep 16, 6:56 pm, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm writing an @interact to solve simple 2nd order differential
> equations and plot solutions. In it, I'd like to typeset the formula:
>
> show(
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Jason Grout
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm writing an @interact to solve simple 2nd order differential
> equations and plot solutions. In it, I'd like to typeset the formula:
>
> show(a*diff(y,t,2)+b*diff(y,t)+c==0)
>
> However, what shows up is the word "diff
I'm writing an @interact to solve simple 2nd order differential
equations and plot solutions. In it, I'd like to typeset the formula:
show(a*diff(y,t,2)+b*diff(y,t)+c==0)
However, what shows up is the word "diff" when I'd really like to see
math notation for a partial or total derivative (dep
Hi Bob,
You can use the bool() function to turn an equation in to a True/False value.
sage: q,j = var('q, j')
sage: a = (2*j*2^(18*q) + 13*2^(18*q)/27 - 13/27)
sage: b = (2^(18*q)*(2*j+0)+13*(2^(18*q)-1)/27)
sage: a == b
2*j*2^(18*q) + 13*2^(18*q)/27 - 13/27 == 2*j*2^(18*q) + 13*(2^(18*q) - 1)/2
Hi all,
Thanks a lot for your nice and quick answer. You have solved my
problem.
Have a nice day wherever you are,
Best regards,
Jérôme Landré
University of Reims
France
On 16 sep, 20:06, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> You can also install nearly any Python library by doing "sa
Still a Sage newbie. I discovered the "==" comparison operator and tried
this:
sage: 2*n+3==(6*n+9)/3
True
sage: 4==5
False
So I thought Sage would be useful to check on some messy algebra I was
doing (one example out of many):
sage: (2*j*2^(18*q) + 13*2^(18*q)/27 - 13/27)
==
(2^(18*q)*(2*j+0
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Yann Le Du <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I tried to email the person apprently responsible for dsage, Yi Qiang,
> about this, to no avail, so I turn to the list.
>
> I use sage, v. 3.1.1, and am trying to build an application (Monte Carlo
> stuff) and
Hello,
I tried to email the person apprently responsible for dsage, Yi Qiang,
about this, to no avail, so I turn to the list.
I use sage, v. 3.1.1, and am trying to build an application (Monte Carlo
stuff) and use dsage to parallelize the code : very easy stuff, just do a
series of jobs, done
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Mike Witt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sage creates shell scripts like this in /usr/local/bin:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ cat /usr/local/bin/maxima#!/bin/sh
> sage -maxima $*
>
> What happens if I install some of these programs (such as Maxima, gap,
> R)
> direct
Sage creates shell scripts like this in /usr/local/bin:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ cat /usr/local/bin/maxima#!/bin/sh
sage -maxima $*
What happens if I install some of these programs (such as Maxima, gap,
R)
directly (for example if I were to do a "yum install maxima") ?
I'm assuming (perhaps I'm w
You can also install nearly any Python library by doing "sage -python
setup.py"
- Robert
On Sep 16, 2008, at 4:26 AM, David Joyner wrote:
>
> Besides Timothy's suggestion, you might be able to install PIL on
> top of
> Sage using
>
> sage -i PIL-1.1.5
>
> It is listed among Sage's experimen
On Tuesday 16 September 2008, Pierre wrote:
> cool, thanks a lot !
The solution to this problem is _really_ simple, if we tell Singular "don't do
tail reduction" then it won't tail reduce. Patch coming up.
Alternatively, the forementioned patches might be interesting to you since
they speed u
cool, thanks a lot !
On Sep 16, 6:42 pm, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 September 2008, Pierre wrote:
>
>
>
> > What did you put in J ? in fact, the following already produces the
> > bug (sorry for not trying earlier, i thought i did try and there was
> > no bug... mu
On Tuesday 16 September 2008, Pierre wrote:
> What did you put in J ? in fact, the following already produces the
> bug (sorry for not trying earlier, i thought i did try and there was
> no bug... must have changed a little something):
>
> sage: k= CyclotomicField(3, "w")
> sage: A= PolynomialRing
What did you put in J ? in fact, the following already produces the
bug (sorry for not trying earlier, i thought i did try and there was
no bug... must have changed a little something):
sage: k= CyclotomicField(3, "w")
sage: A= PolynomialRing(k, ["y9", "y12", "y13", "y15"])
sage: y9, y12, y13, y1
Dear Jerome,
On Sep 16, 1:26 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is listed among Sage's experimental packages
> athttp://www.sagemath.org/packages/experimental/
> (which means it might work and it might not:-).
One encouraging remark: On my Suse Linux 64bit machine, the
experimen
Besides Timothy's suggestion, you might be able to install PIL on top of
Sage using
sage -i PIL-1.1.5
It is listed among Sage's experimental packages at
http://www.sagemath.org/packages/experimental/
(which means it might work and it might not:-).
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTEC
> that's what i expect from the term 'reduction' anyway
reduce is defined as:
Reduce an element modulo the reduced Groebner basis for this
ideal. This returns 0 if and only if the element is in this
ideal. In any case, this reduction is unique up to
Hello,
We're pleased to announce:
OpenOpt v 0.19, free (license: BSD) optimization framework
(written in Python language) with connections to lots of solvers (some
are C- or Fortran-written) is released.
Changes since previous release 0.18 (June 15, 2008):
* Some changes for NLP/NSP solver r
hi there,
this is going to be even worse than my recent bug report in terms of
reproducing the error. I guess i'll start with describing what
happens, and then if someone tells me that it's a bug and not a
feature, then i'll try to get a minimal example.
So I've got a polynomial ring with a few
cool !
now look for another bizarre bug report from me in a coming thread...
On Sep 15, 7:03 pm, "Craig Citro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pierre,
>
> You'll be happy to hear that I got the following response from the
> Singular team this morning:
>
> =
>
> Hello Craig Citro,
> thanks f
Sage doesn't use your system install of Python, but instead it uses
the one included in the Sage distribution.
Assuming you are building PIL from source use the command: sage
-python setup.py install
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:56 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have
> Do you have the jsmath TeX fonts installed? Click on the "jsmath" icon
> at the bottom of the page and check to see if it says "jsMath v3.5 (TeX
> fonts)". If it doesn't, that may be the problem.
>
> If you don't have the tex fonts, you might go
> tohttp://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/dow
29 matches
Mail list logo
