On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> I will be happy to hear any issues that you may find
>> in it, before I open a ticket for this enhancement.
>
> I've only been marginally following this issue (thanks for all your
> work on it BTW) but typically it's better to
On Apr 7, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I will be happy to hear any issues that you may find
> in it, before I open a ticket for this enhancement.
I've only been marginally following this issue (thanks for all your
work on it BTW) but typically it's better to creat
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
>> Should I submit patches for each of these functions
>> separately?
>
> I think one patch covering all of the functions would be fine. It's one
> logical issue.
... So here goes the patch to enhance the typesetting capability
of symbo
William Stein wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Golam Mortuza Hossain
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM, rjf wrote:
>>>
On Apr 5, 9:06 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Tim Lahey wrote:
> My recommendation is:
>
> \frac{\mathrm{d} f(x)}{\mathrm{d} x}
>
> This ensures an upright d. It's what I use for all derivatives based
> upon
> "A Guide to LaTeX". Also, I'm not sure you really need to use \left and
> \right for a single term. I
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 3:58 PM, rjf wrote:
>> So here are the situations
>>
>> (1) diff( f(x), x) =>
>>
>> (a) Current scheme via Maxima:
>> {{{\it \partial}}\over{{\it \partial}\,x}}\,f\left(x\right)
>>
>> (b) Proposed:
>> \frac{d f\left(x\right)}{d x}
>>
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Golam Mortuza Hossain
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM, rjf wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 5, 9:06 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
>>>
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 4:05 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM, rjf wrote:
>
>> On Apr 5, 9:06 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
>> This does not seem to be true.
>>
>> I just ran Maxima on 'diff(f(x),x)
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:58 AM, rjf wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 5, 9:06 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>>
>> >>> (1) \int dx f(x)
>> >>> (2) \int f(x) dx
>>
>> >>
On Apr 5, 9:06 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
>
> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
> >>> (1) \int dx f(x)
> >>> (2) \int f(x) dx
>
> >> I prefer (2).
>
> > I've actually never seen (1) used; (2) see
On Apr 5, 2009, at 12:06 PM, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>>
(1) \int dx f(x)
(2) \int f(x) dx
>>>
>>> I prefer (2).
>>
>> I've actually never seen (1) used
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
>
> On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
>>> (1) \int dx f(x)
>>> (2) \int f(x) dx
>>
>> I prefer (2).
>
> I've actually never seen (1) used; (2) seems much more natural. The
> "\int dx \int dy f" is strange as the "dx
On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>> (1) \int dx f(x)
>> (2) \int f(x) dx
>
> I prefer (2).
I've actually never seen (1) used; (2) seems much more natural. The
"\int dx \int dy f" is strange as the "dx dy" is often best viewed as
single differential.
- Robert
--~--~---
At the risk of stating the obvious for some people, the TeX
processing, including defining new forms,
is directly available in Maxima, without the overhead of Sage.
For example,
texput( riemann, "{\\mathcal R}")$
followed by tex( expression with riemann...) --> tex stuff.
While I have
>
> (1) \int dx f(x)
> (2) \int f(x) dx
I prefer (2).
Nick
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit th
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 10:11 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>> Jason: I was wondering whether you have opened any
>> ticket on this issue? If not, then I will try it myself.
>
> I don't think I opened any tickets on this.
OK, I will do it.
>> Should I submit patches for each of these functions
>>
Hi Golam,
Thanks for letting me know. Not a problem at all, I was just curious. I
look forward to seeing it in action.
Cheers
Stan
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi Stan,
>
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote:
>
>> -
>> sui.set_la
Hi Stan,
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote:
> -
> sui.set_latex('s_{u,i}')
> sui(x) = function('sui',x)
> latex(sui(x))
>
> s_{u,i}\left(x\right)
> -
>
> Or would the function assignment sui(
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>>> here is a patch that adds two missing Greek
>>> letters "phi" and "Phi" to the list "common_varnames".
>>>
>>> Could you please open a ticket for this patch? It is created
>>> on top of sage-3.4 vers
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>>here is a patch that adds two missing Greek
>>letters "phi" and "Phi" to the list "common_varnames".
>>
>> Could you please open a ticket for this patch? It is created
>> on top of sage-3.4 version.
>
> Actually, if you want to see the de
Hi Golam,
This looks good. Would the following work as well?
-
sui.set_latex('s_{u,i}')
sui(x) = function('sui',x)
latex(sui(x))
s_{u,i}\left(x\right)
-
Or would the function assignment sui(x) = function('sui',
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 5:58 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote:
> I was thinking of custom defined latex representations of different
> variables or functions, similar to the example I showed in my first
> email in this thread. Basically, I would like to be able to give
> working names to variables
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 09:52:18 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> (3) Implement _latex_ method for "diff", "integrate",
> within Sage itself. Assuming, pynac-based symbolics in Sage
> is in near-horizon, one would need these methods anyway.
>
> At this point, I think, it w
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> As a guess, we might be calling out to maxima to latex the integral or
> derivative, so that might explain where the problem lies.
Yes, you are quite right. Now I have been able to locate the code where
Sage is calling maxima for Tex-in
Hi Golam,
Thanks a lot for looking into this. It would be great if you could fix
this along the way when you solve your original problem.
Cheers,
Stan
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi Stan,
>
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 5:58 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote:
>
>> I was thinking of custom defined l
Hi Stan,
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 5:58 AM, Stan Schymanski wrote:
>
> I was thinking of custom defined latex representations of different
> variables or functions, similar to the example I showed in my first
> email in this thread. Basically, I would like to be able to give
> working names to var
I was thinking of custom defined latex representations of different
variables or functions, similar to the example I showed in my first
email in this thread. Basically, I would like to be able to give
working names to variables (e.g. sui), but display them as I would in
a paper if I use the show c
Hi Burcin,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
> 5. Recurse nicely with subscripts.
>
> How is your function different, apart from the fact that you don't
> process suffixes recursively?
In one sentence: the new function returns False for un-told situations
whereas the exis
Hi,
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:11:39 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Jason: I am attaching the patch for enhancing typesetting of
> functions. I need to add doc-tests though. In the patch, I have
> implemented all the situations that I planned to do.
>
> Apart from the situations I mentioned
Hi Stan,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Stan Schymanski
> It seems that you and Jason are getting a firm grip on this, which is
> great. Just out of curiosity and my ignorance of the underlying code: Is
> your aim to hard-code certain functions, or is your aim to provide the
> users with the po
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Jason Grout
>> I think at this point, it'd be good to post a patch so that we can all
>> see the full change. Do you know how to make a patch with mercurial?
>> Have you been using version control to save your change
Hi Jason,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Jason Grout
>
> I think at this point, it'd be good to post a patch so that we can all
> see the full change. Do you know how to make a patch with mercurial?
> Have you been using version control to save your changes?
Frankly, I am trying to learn mer
Hi Golam,
It seems that you and Jason are getting a firm grip on this, which is
great. Just out of curiosity and my ignorance of the underlying code: Is
your aim to hard-code certain functions, or is your aim to provide the
users with the possibility of defining the latex representation of the
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> Also, I think naming the function is_latex_name or something like that
>> would be better. common_varnames says nothing to me about the variable
>> name
>
> Thanks Jason for your suggestions. I have
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> Also, I think naming the function is_latex_name or something like that
> would be better. common_varnames says nothing to me about the variable
> name
Thanks Jason for your suggestions. I have renamed the
function. Also, I have made som
Jason Grout wrote:
> Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>> Hi Jason,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Jason Grout
>>> Can you post your patch that makes the functions typeset as greek
>>> letters?
>> This is my first attempt to modify Sage. So please feel free
>> to correct me. Let me mention th
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Jason Grout
>> Can you post your patch that makes the functions typeset as greek
>> letters?
>
> This is my first attempt to modify Sage. So please feel free
> to correct me. Let me mention the changes I have made
>
Thanks Stan!
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Stan Schymanski wrote:
> Thus, I think that
> the problem is not in the definition of the latex reprentations of
> integral and diff, but in what happens when you define psi(x) =
> function('psi',x). In my view, this is where the trouble starts.
Ye
Hi Jason,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Jason Grout
> Can you post your patch that makes the functions typeset as greek
> letters?
This is my first attempt to modify Sage. So please feel free
to correct me. Let me mention the changes I have made
to get the elementary support for typesetting
Hi Golam,
+1 for this enhancement! I look forward to using it and I wouldn't mind
helping if needed. Could you let me know how you got it to work? In
combination with the show() command? I can't answer your question below,
but here is what I used to do for variables that I wanted to print
nic
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am trying to enhance the support for latex-formatting
> of "SymbolicFunctionEvaluation" in Sage. In particular,
> when their names match with Greek letters then Sage
> should use formatting similar to the formatting of
> "SymbolicVariable".
>
> In Ph
41 matches
Mail list logo
