Francois,
Never mind, I think I figured it out. Apparently, sage initializes .001 in
MPFR using the fact that .001 = 1/1000. Using the appropriate set methods
in MPFR fixes the issue. Attached is the code that makes Sage and MPFR
agree.
Apparently, if I treat .001 as a float or double in MP
Francois,
Thank you for your reply. That's what I figured also, but where is the
difference between the two codes?
Thanks,
Rick
On Thursday, October 2, 2014 8:32:45 PM UTC-4, François wrote:
>
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 17:28:15 ref...@uncg.edu wrote:
> > When comparing the digits though, it app
Dear All,
I appreciate any help that I can get with this question. Thank you in
advance.
I've been converting some of my algorithms that wrote using Sage into C. I
noticed that it appears that MPFR and Sage do not match when taking
logarithms of certain values at arbitrary precision. As an
Oh, FEM brings me back to my master's days. Programming the FEM can
sometimes be painful. Perhaps I'm not the best one to ask about this, but
you can use implement in python using Numpy and Scipy...and then run it in
Sage.
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:52:37 PM UTC-5, Chris Gorman wrote:
Chris,
I'm not sure what you are looking for. But, I'm planning on submitting
some personal algorithms to sage. Sometimes I had to make some
improvements to built-in functions to suit my purpose. For example,
numerical integration built into sage is not arbitrary precision...which I
had to
Thank you for responses. It seems that the best solution would be to use
pari in the way that Dr. Stein said earlier.
Again, I'm new to the development process and would like to contribute to
sage. Should I submit a ticket and write my own patch and submit it now?
I'm not sure how developmen
Ah, I see what you mean. If that's the case then I understand. How does
one find out if this is true?
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 7:46:21 AM UTC-5, Jori Mantysalo wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, ref...@uncg.edu wrote:
>
> > I don't understand what you mean. The real and complex fields ar
I don't understand what you mean. The real and complex fields are loaded
upon start up. It seems as though time testing that if the user wishes to
compute gamma(x) for real x, he would achieve a faster result by changing x
into a complex number and then computing gamma(x). I don't know how to
I'm very sorry for the wording. Allow me to clarify. Let x be a real
number. When I use the algorithm RR(x).gamma() the value is calculated
using mpfr. If on the other hand I decide to use arbitrary precision
complex numbers, the value is computed using pari. I assumed that
implementations
Dear All,
I was developing an algorithm that depended on the calculation of the gamma
function. I noticed that the algorithm was surprisingly slow. Upon
investigation, I realized that the issue lies with the gamma function. To
illustrate:
sage: RR = RealField(1000)
sage: CC = ComplexField(1
kcrisman,
I'm not sure if this is the type of example you're looking for as it's a
little different, but I understand the frustration personally. A few years
back I was a consultant at a company. This company needed some hairy math
problems solved and algorithms developed to model a physical
Dr. Stein,
I posted this somewhere else, but it seems that it failed to deliver.
I would like to express my interest in attending. Do I need to fill out an
application of some sort?
Since I'm new to the group, I will share a little about me. I'm currently
a graduate student at the University o
Dear All,
I have yet another question. I'm trying to compute many values of the
logarithm and store them into memory for future use. Is there any way to
get around the initialization of x within the for loop? If I delete that
line, then all the values of the loop will be the same... How can
Thank you for the replies! I appreciate it!
Thanks,
Rick
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:51:30 PM UTC-5, ref...@uncg.edu wrote:
>
> Before I begin, I'd like to thank you in advance for any help I get with
> this question. I'm currently working with some heavy computation and
> decided to cy
Before I begin, I'd like to thank you in advance for any help you may give.
I'm trying to learn cython, and I'd like to use the RealNumber class. I'd
like to take a RealNumber as input, and compute the square of the
RealNumber, and return it. There is a catch though, I'd like to compute
this
One last thing I failed to mention, GNU MPC and mpfr are already installed
on my machine.
Thanks,
Rick
On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:51:30 PM UTC-5, ref...@uncg.edu wrote:
>
> Before I begin, I'd like to thank you in advance for any help I get with
> this question. I'm currently working wi
Before I begin, I'd like to thank you in advance for any help I get with
this question. I'm currently working with some heavy computation and
decided to cython-ize my code. Because of what I'm doing in my math
research, I will need to make MILLIONS of calls to pretty high level
complex functi
Dear All,
I want it to be known that I no longer have issues with my installation of SAGE
as I've already fixed this issue myself. I just thought I'd report it.
I decided to upgrade SAGE from an earlier version I had because of the extra
files it created when I attached .sage files. When I le
18 matches
Mail list logo
