Am 2014-12-15 um 12:00 schrieb David Roe:
> The difference is in how cpdef functions interact with Cython vs Python
> classes. If you want to override a cpdef method in a *Python* subclass then
> you
> must use def (of course). But in a *Cython* subclass, you must use cpdef. If
> you accidental
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 5:37:25 PM UTC-2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> However, I wonder if there is a more elegant solution: is
> there currently a way to determine whether a given Parent class models
> the real numbers, such that code like the above could be replaced with
>
> if RC.is_real_
On 2014-12-16 23:08, Nils Bruin wrote:
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 5:37:25 PM UTC-2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
However, I wonder if there is a more elegant solution: is
there currently a way to determine whether a given Parent class models
the real numbers, such that code like the abov
Yes, sorry, the formula is x0 -f(x0)/f'([X])
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send e
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 12:21:28 PM UTC-8, kcrisman wrote:
>
> Would you agree to change the word to symbolically then?
>>
>>
> I don't really care; I care about better symbolic/algebraic solving in
> Sage, though I am not in a position to provide it. That sounds fine.
>
the name of the
>
> Would you agree to change the word to symbolically then?
>
>
I don't really care; I care about better symbolic/algebraic solving in
Sage, though I am not in a position to provide it. That sounds fine.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-de
On 2014-12-16 18:30, mmarco wrote:
I'm still looking for a good converse of Henrici's 6.4g for (2). In
the real case, it is sufficient to test that f'(x) != 0 for all x in
the interval (just a single polynomial evaluation using interval
arithmetic). Is there an analogous test tha
Hi,
Le 16/12/2014 12:13, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit :
Hello sage-devel,
I am wondering if there is an algorithm implemented in Sage which can
isolate a complex root of a given polynomial?
The typical use case is that I have a polynomial for which I know one
approximate root and I want to find a co
On Dec 16, 2014 11:39 AM, "kcrisman" wrote:
>>
>> In particular, we should delete "algebraically", since, e.g.,
>>
>
> I agree with rjf that in this context, it means "symbolically", fwiw.
>
Would you agree to change the word to symbolically then?
> --
> You received this message because you are
>
> In particular, we should delete "algebraically", since, e.g.,
>
>
I agree with rjf that in this context, it means "symbolically", fwiw.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
Ticket #17495 happened because of a statement
if is_RealField(RC) or RC is RDF:
where RLF (Real Lazy Field) was forgotten. The easy fix is to add RLF as
extra case. However, I wonder if there is a more elegant solution: is
there currently a way to determine whether a given Parent class models
In #17198, I proposed a patch to have RealIntervalFieldElement.min (and .max)
accept more than one other argument in order to compute the minimum (or maximum)
of more than two RealIntervalFieldElements.
It would also help me for another ticket (#17222) if someone could review this
one.
Thank you
On Friday, December 5, 2014 1:35:09 PM UTC+1, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
>
> On Friday, December 5, 2014 1:08:14 PM UTC+1, Jori Mantysalo wrote:
>>
>>
>> Having documentation arranged by technical implementation is also bad.
>> Having TESTS-section shown for normal user is bad. Having is_lattice()
On 2014-12-16 17:53, Samuel Lelievre wrote:
2014-12-16 15:05:14 UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote:
Isn't that what complex_roots is supposed to do:
Yes, but I specifically care about only one root and then it seems
overkill to have to compute *all* roots to do that.
--
You received this message
>
>
> I'm still looking for a good converse of Henrici's 6.4g for (2). In the
> real case, it is sufficient to test that f'(x) != 0 for all x in the
> interval (just a single polynomial evaluation using interval arithmetic).
> Is there an analogous test that holds on a complex disk? The CEVAL t
2014-12-16 15:05:14 UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Isn't that what complex_roots is supposed to do:
>
> sage: from sage.rings.polynomial.complex_roots import complex_roots
> sage: x = polygen(ZZ)
> sage: complex_roots(x^5 - x - 1)
> [(1.167303978261419?, 1),
> (-0.764884433600585? - 0.35247154603
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 6:43:27 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
> >> > What do you suppose is going on at WRI,
> >
> >
> > http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+sqrt%28x%29+%3D+x
> >
> > seems to be quite happy to tell us that the solutions are x=0 and x=1 .
> > Just sayin', tho
>
> > Well, you could assert that there is no discussion, but you are
> apparently
> > wrong.
> > sqrt has 2 values except at zero. (in the complex plane, or on the real
> > line).
> >
> > for example, sqrt(9) is the set {-3,3} . That is how it is
> extended.
> > and sqrt(1) is {-1,1}
Isn't that what complex_roots is supposed to do:
sage: from sage.rings.polynomial.complex_roots import complex_roots
sage: x = polygen(ZZ)
sage: complex_roots(x^5 - x - 1)
[(1.167303978261419?, 1),
(-0.764884433600585? - 0.352471546031727?*I, 1),
(-0.764884433600585? + 0.352471546031727?*I, 1),
For the record, this does not block on Fedora 20. Really xdg-open should
return as soon as it is clear that the viewer started (or, possibly, failed
to start). The exit code indicates success or failure, and it would be
pointless to only report success after you close the viewer manually. You
e
> but it's actually the only solution I have so far. What's wrong with it?
I have no idea. I use things like that all the time and I don't have
much to complain of. But I guess that the clean way to do it would be
to know why some programs will automatically run in the background
while some other
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 12:14:09 PM UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> Hello sage-devel,
>
> I am wondering if there is an algorithm implemented in Sage which can
> isolate a complex root of a given polynomial?
>
> The typical use case is that I have a polynomial for which I know one
> ap
>
> > Thank you so much! Yes, this works! I suggest to put this as a second
> > example in
>
> Err... It's not exactly an elegant solution :-P
>
but it's actually the only solution I have so far. What's wrong with it?
Will it erase my brain after using it 42 times?
Martin
--
You r
Yo !
> Thank you so much! Yes, this works! I suggest to put this as a second
> example in
Err... It's not exactly an elegant solution :-P
> As a second example, to make 'evince' start as a background process, you
> can use
>
> sage: viewer.pdf_viewer("screen -d -m evince")
>
> (I h
>
> > h: the behaviour depends on the viewer, so it's evince's fault???!!!
>
> Other way: you could try to replace "evince" by "screen -d -m evince".
> It. "works" :-P
>
Thank you so much! Yes, this works! I suggest to put this as a second
example in
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/refe
Hello sage-devel,
I am wondering if there is an algorithm implemented in Sage which can
isolate a complex root of a given polynomial?
The typical use case is that I have a polynomial for which I know one
approximate root and I want to find a complex interval around that root
which contains n
26 matches
Mail list logo
