What about exp(-x)/2 ?
in maxima, ratdenom says 2*exp(x)
denom say 2
I gather that Ginac is more like ratdenom. But maybe Ginac simply has
no way of expressing exp(-x).
I assume Sage does.
Have fun.
RJF
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
Hi,
I have a doctest such as:
sage: Partitions(10).cardinality()
2749351056977569651267751632098635268817342931598005475820312598430214732811496417305505074166073662159015784477429624894049306307020046179276449303351011607934245719015571894350972531246610845200636955893446424
On Nov 25, 11:30 am, Volker Braun wrote:
> Poking around a bit on the wolfram web page, it seems that
> * Compiling C code requires a 3rd party compiler, otherwise it will fall
> back to mathematica byte-code
> * Mathematica will run the compiler for you, you only have to point
> Mathematica
On Friday, November 25, 2011 5:30:40 PM UTC, doyen...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I was not trying to make any claims. My link was only for those that
> are not aware of
> JNA and usually make the claim that JNI is the only way.
I'm sorry if I offended you.
If you would have posted the above explanatio
Poking around a bit on the wolfram web page, it seems that
* Compiling C code requires a 3rd party compiler, otherwise it will fall
back to mathematica byte-code
* Mathematica will run the compiler for you, you only have to point
Mathematica to the desired compiler.
* this is new in Mathema
On Nov 25, 10:28 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Nov 25, 2011 10:18 AM, "rjf" wrote:
>
>
>
> > We could always continue this discussion on sage-flame.
>
> Please do. This thread should be about Mathematica and the extent to
> which their claim to have a compiler for arbitrary Mathematica progra
On Nov 25, 2011 10:18 AM, "rjf" wrote:
>
> We could always continue this discussion on sage-flame.
Please do. This thread should be about Mathematica and the extent to
which their claim to have a compiler for arbitrary Mathematica programs is
actually true.
William
> I think that persons who
On Nov 25, 2011 9:30 AM, "Alfredo Portes" wrote:
>
> I was not trying to make any claims. My link was only for those that
> are not aware of
> JNA and usually make the claim that JNI is the only way.
>
> But I appreciate your message as it reminds me of how welcoming this list
is.
> No WTFs needed
We could always continue this discussion on sage-flame.
I think that persons who wish to use this functionality in Maxima
could
consider that maybe they should just use Maxima.
Exposing this functionality better from the Sage top
level may be possible, but not something that I am interested in
d
I was not trying to make any claims. My link was only for those that
are not aware of
JNA and usually make the claim that JNI is the only way.
But I appreciate your message as it reminds me of how welcoming this list is.
No WTFs needed, ignore me, and like Ted Kosan I am out of here.
On Fri, Nov
Thanks for your well-thought out contribution. I'm sure you are aware that
JNA, although it sucks slightly less than JNI, doesn't support C++. So its
back to writing C stubs to use instances from one object-oriented language
in another object-oriented language. WTF!
On Friday, November 25, 2011
Sage-devel was so nice for the last few months with out Richard Fateman
FUD...
On Nov 25, 2011 8:13 AM, "rjf" wrote:
>
> re: writing stubs to access C (etc) libraries from Lisp.
>
> There are several lisp programs which will take your *.h files and
> attempt to
> automatically write all the stubs
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 9:25 PM, rjf wrote:
>
> William seems to prefer to tout the Sage-Cython link.
That's because we use Cython, and it's easy to use in Sage, and
provides a fully-functional language-native interface between Cython
and Sage. Not a single part of that is true about the Maxima
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> I think thats the actual advantage of Cython. Every interpreter can dload a
> library somehow. But try to mix a shared library, some custom C++ code, and
> the interpreter of your choice. In any commercial Ma* or Java JNI you'll
> invariably
re: writing stubs to access C (etc) libraries from Lisp.
There are several lisp programs which will take your *.h files and
attempt to
automatically write all the stubs. This cannot be entirely automated
but
my limited experience with this suggests it can be quite successful.
I've linked to libr
Hi all!
Sorry, I was not aware that singular has SAGBI bases. So, I'll give
the person who asked about it a corresponding pointer.
Thank you
Simon
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@goog
Thank you for the solution.
However, it raised questions about backward compatibility of cython...
Best,
David.
On Nov 25, 7:54 am, Simon King wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 25 Nov., 00:18, David Coudert wrote:
>
> > The following code is working perfectly with sage-4.7.2 and sage-4.8.alpha0
> > bu
Hi Simon,
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 06:58:15 -0800 (PST)
Simon King wrote:
> After some "serach_src", it seems to me that there are no SAGBI bases
> in Sage.
>
> Are there plans to add them? Is there free software (with appropriate
> licence) that one could build upon? If I remember correctly, Nicolas
Hi Simon,
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 06:58:15AM -0800, Simon King wrote:
> After some "serach_src", it seems to me that there are no SAGBI bases
> in Sage.
>
> Are there plans to add them? Is there free software (with appropriate
> licence) that one could build upon? If I remember correctly,
Singular seems to have a function related to
it: http://www.singular.uni-kl.de/Manual/3-0-3/sing_915.htm
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this
Hi folks!
After some "serach_src", it seems to me that there are no SAGBI bases
in Sage.
Are there plans to add them? Is there free software (with appropriate
licence) that one could build upon? If I remember correctly, Nicolas
Thiéry used SAGBI bases for computing invariant rings of permutation
On Friday, November 25, 2011 10:33:24 AM UTC, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> Note that another selling point of Cython is not just writing new
> (fast) code, but interfacing with existing low-level libraries in a
> clean way.
>
I think thats the actual advantage of Cython. Every interpreter can dload
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:16 PM, rjf wrote:
>
> Maxima compiles code to binary, and has done so, oh for a couple of
> decades.
>
> Since Maxima is part of Sage, one might hope that William would be
> aware of this feature.
In the spirit of being mutually informative, here's how it's done in Sage
Hi Burcin,
> Your example was trying to multiply two instances of the class bla.
> Here is what I guess you meant to write:
>
> sage: m1 = bla()
> sage: m2 = bla()
> sage: a, b = x.ind[m1],2*x.ind[m2]
> Traceback (most recent call last)
>
> in sage.symbolic.expression.Expression._add_
> (s
On Nov 24, 10:53 pm, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> It's a good question how to make this capability used in Sage.
This capability is already perfectly usable in Sage:
sage: M=sage.calculus.calculus.maxima
sage: M.eval("g(x):=block([s:0],for i thru x do s:s+i^2,s);")
'g(x):=block([s:0],forithruxdos:s+i
25 matches
Mail list logo
