OK, that was too easy, as there was an exact symbolic solution.
Is this a solution Sage could have given symbolically as well?
Here are the results for sin(1/x)==x on [-1,1] :
It apparently computed many solutions and originally asked me whether I
wanted to show all the found solutions or ju
On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 10:23:44 PM UTC, saad khalid wrote:
>
> I have to apologize, I gave a slightly incorrect Mathematica code earlier,
> the actual code was:
>
> Solve[ Exp[-2*a*x]-1+4*a*x==0,x]//N
>
> The earlier code gave the wrong answer. Anyways:
>
> it could be a different functi
I have to apologize, I gave a slightly incorrect Mathematica code earlier,
the actual code was:
Solve[ Exp[-2*a*x]-1+4*a*x==0,x]//N
The earlier code gave the wrong answer. Anyways:
it could be a different function, which potentially would run much longer,
> by repetitive splitting of the inter
On 2018-03-15, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> it could be a different function, which potentially would run much longer,
> by repetitive splitting of the interval
> (I guess that's what Mathematica is doing)
I have toyed with the idea of repurposing whatever adaptive splitting
code is in the plottin
On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 2:25:00 AM UTC, saad khalid wrote:
>
> That is a good point, however I feel an even better solution in that case
> would be giving some of the roots and then giving some indication that
> there are an infinite number of roots. Disregarding the case where there
>
On 2018-03-15 13:22, Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
but the variant below doesn't?
That's certainly a bug: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24987
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
Hi,
Can anyone explain why the following works:
- 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< - 8< -
$ ~/co/sage/sage --version
SageMath version 8.2.beta8, Release Date: 2018-03-10
$ head foo.pyx setup.py
==> foo.pyx <==
from sage.libs.gmp.types cimport mpz_t
==> setup.
