hi,
I'm really surprised about the consideration for a remark like  a
newbie like me.
Of course computational precision is important, the little game i was
showing leads to a soluion
around 0.00001 for ra and rb.
So that brings us to part 2: convert to string; works for an isolated
number, but not for mixtures of symbolic and numeric expressions I
would think.
Can the latex (or generic) output expression be parsed for pretty
printing (his means find the numbers in the expression and  put them
through %f% ?
thanks
m


 12 dec, 16:06, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote:
> Simon King wrote:
> > Hi Marc!
>
> > On 12 Dez., 15:48, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote:
> >> marcW wrote:
> > [...]
> >> If you don't care about precision (i.e., all numbers are rounded off to
> >> 2-3 digits), then you can declare your numbers this way:
>
> >> sage: R=RealField(15)
> >> sage: R(pi)
> > [...]
>
> > Or, if you *do* care about the precision in the computation, but don't
> > want to see more then 3 digits in the final result, you may do
> >   sage: print 1.0
> >   1.00000000000000
> >   sage: print '%.3f'%1.0
> >   1.000
>
> Hmmm.  Yeah, we probably ought to make this easier to just print the
> first n digits after the decimal by default for RR numbers, or to not
> print out the trailing zeros.  I can't imagine telling my students, for
> example, that they need to do '%.3f'%num every time they come across a
> number, especially since they just want to display the equation, not
> format it as a string.
>
> What do people think about this interface?
>
> sage: RR.print_digits=3
> sage: 3.09384
> 3.094
> sage: RR.print_trailing_zeros=False
> sage: RR.print_digits=None
> sage: 3.09384
> 3.09384
>
> Make it something like the RR.scientific_notation flag that is currently
> in use.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> --
> Jason Grout

-- 
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org

Reply via email to