Indeed it does! These plots are very nice.
On Oct 16, 2012, at 1:35 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> On 10/16/2012 12:02 PM, Michael Wilber wrote:
>> Does surface3d and isosurface3d from racket/plot do what you want?
>>
>> file:///usr/share/racket/doc/plot/renderer3d.html?q=isosurface#(def._((lib._plo
On 10/16/2012 12:02 PM, Michael Wilber wrote:
Does surface3d and isosurface3d from racket/plot do what you want?
file:///usr/share/racket/doc/plot/renderer3d.html?q=isosurface#(def._((lib._plot/main..rkt)._isosurface3d))
In particular:
#lang racket
(require plot)
(define (f x y)
(+ 2 (* 2
Does surface3d and isosurface3d from racket/plot do what you want?
file:///usr/share/racket/doc/plot/renderer3d.html?q=isosurface#(def._((lib._plot/main..rkt)._isosurface3d))
Gregory Woodhouse writes:
> I'm intrigued. I suppose pattern based macros could be used to implement
> operations like +
I'm intrigued. I suppose pattern based macros could be used to implement
operations like + and *, and passing to the field of quotients should formally
be no different from rational arithmetic. Are you interested in Chebyshev
polynomials for a particular reason (e.g, applications to differential
I hadn't thought of making two passes. Thanks!
I'd have to have the terms indexed by two different orderings
(nondecreasing in x's degree and nondecreasing in y's), or be willing to
sort. That seems tricky or slowish, but much better than what I've had
in mind. It should also work with other o
I suppose I'm just stating the obvious here, but R[x, y] is naturally
isomorphic to R[x][y]. That is, polynomials in x and y over the ring R have a
natural interpretation as polynomials in y over the ring R[x] of polynomials
over R. So, if you had a good library for working with polynomials (of
On 10/15/2012 11:49 AM, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
2012/10/15 Stephen Bloch :
But probably slower, at least for exact numbers. If "expt" were implemented naively as "for i
= 1 to num", the total number of multiplications would be quadratic in degree; if it were implemented by
repeated squaring
2012/10/15 Stephen Bloch :
> But probably slower, at least for exact numbers. If "expt" were implemented
> naively as "for i = 1 to num", the total number of multiplications would be
> quadratic in degree; if it were implemented by repeated squaring, the total
> number of multiplications would
On Oct 15, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
> What degree of polynomial, I wonder, would it take to find a
> noticeable difference between these?
To distinguish between linear and quadratic, probably thousands to millions
(depending on whether "noticeable" means "to a human being" or "to
What degree of polynomial, I wonder, would it take to find a
noticeable difference between these?
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Stephen Bloch wrote:
>
> On Oct 15, 2012, at 10:44 AM, Justin R. Slepak wrote:
>
>> Ah, I forgot about for/sum. This version is probably clearer:
>>
>> (struct polyno
On Oct 15, 2012, at 10:44 AM, Justin R. Slepak wrote:
> Ah, I forgot about for/sum. This version is probably clearer:
>
> (struct polynomial (coeffs)
> #:transparent
> #:property prop:procedure
> (lambda (poly num)
> (for/sum ([x (length (polynomial-coeffs poly))]
> [c (polynomial-
Slepak
PhD student, Computer Science dept.
- Original Message -
From: Matthias Felleisen
To: Justin R. Slepak
Cc: users@racket-lang.org
Sent: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:02:17 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [racket] Function composition in Racket
Do you want to try for/sum here?
On Oct 14, 2012, at
r Science dept.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Gregory Woodhouse
> To: Justin R. Slepak
> Sent: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 22:07:59 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [racket] Function composition in Racket
>
> Thanks! This does what I want. To tell you the truth, I've shied aw
t: Re: [racket] Function composition in Racket
Thanks! This does what I want. To tell you the truth, I've shied away from
prop:procedure (probably more due to my own confusion than anything else!). The
define-values here seems a bit mysterious, but I assume the point is to support
the
that?
---
Justin Slepak
PhD student, Computer Science dept.
- Original Message -
From: Gregory Woodhouse
To: Racket Mailing List
Sent: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 19:00:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [racket] Function composition in Racket
I wrote a small recursive function to convert a list (a0 a1 .
Uh... never mind. I should have looked for the obvious
> (define (f x) (+ x 1))
> (define (g x) (* x x))
> ((compose f g) 1)
2
> ((compose f g) 2)
5
>
On Oct 14, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Gregory Woodhouse wrote:
> Now, my question is: is there a notation in Racket for representing
> composition tha
I wrote a small recursive function to convert a list (a0 a1 ... an)
coefficients into a polynomial function
;;Given a list (a0 a1 ... an) return a function that computes
;;p(x) = a0 + a1*x + ... + an*x^n
(define (polynomial coeffs)
(lambda (x)
(cond
[(= (length coeffs) 0) 0]
[
17 matches
Mail list logo
