On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 5/15/10 3:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It would be useful to have a page like this excellent page:
>>
>> http://www.scipy.org/NumPy_for_Matlab_Users
>
>
>
> Here is a start for graph theory:
>
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org
On 5/15/10 3:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
Hi,
It would be useful to have a page like this excellent page:
http://www.scipy.org/NumPy_for_Matlab_Users
Here is a start for graph theory:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/wiki/GraphTheoryRoadmap
(or an earlier version in table form:
ht
On 05/15/10 09:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
Hi,
It would be useful to have a page like this excellent page:
http://www.scipy.org/NumPy_for_Matlab_Users
William
That is very impressive.
dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this
Hi,
It would be useful to have a page like this excellent page:
http://www.scipy.org/NumPy_for_Matlab_Users
William
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> On 05/15/10 08:03 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
>>
>> On 15 Mai, 19:52, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
>>>
>>> I think t
On 15 Mai, 21:21, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> On 05/15/10 08:03 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
> >> I think a huge table of Mathematica/MATLAB/Sage/Magma equivalent functions
> >> would
> >> be useful.
>
> > Especially for people who want to use Sage and are already familiar
> > with Mathematica/MAT
On 05/15/10 08:03 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
On 15 Mai, 19:52, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
I think the biggest thing this proves is just how poorly that NIST table was put
together.
Ask them for founding a better one compiled by you... ;-)
Not quite sure I follow that.
I think a huge tab
On 15 Mai, 19:52, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> I think the biggest thing this proves is just how poorly that NIST table was
> put
> together.
Ask them for founding a better one compiled by you... ;-)
> I think a huge table of Mathematica/MATLAB/Sage/Magma equivalent functions
> would
> be usefu
On 05/15/10 05:22 PM, Harald Schilly wrote:
On May 14, 10:52 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
According to that table, Mathematica can't do the Lambert W-Function. As a
non-mathematician, that does not mean a lot to me, but reading.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LambertW-Function.html
That's inte
On May 14, 10:52 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
> According to that table, Mathematica can't do the Lambert W-Function. As a
> non-mathematician, that does not mean a lot to me, but reading.
>
> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LambertW-Function.html
That's interesting. My first thought was that our S
On 5/14/10 9:32 AM, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Harald Schilly
mailto:harald.schi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I found a table by NIST comparing sage with other software packages.
It's probably interesting for what they are looking for and I think
some entries
On 14 Mai, 19:02, kcrisman wrote:
> It does seem a little out of date. A lot of those functions are
> included either via Maxima, mpmath, or Pynac (and probably also Pari,
> GSL, etc.) For instance, I believe we now have the psi functions.
Yes. According to that list, the functions of Sage form
On May 14, 10:01 am, Harald Schilly wrote:
> I found a table by NIST comparing sage with other software packages.
> It's probably interesting for what they are looking for and I think
> some entries are missing (feedback link at the bottom). Maybe worth
> checking this out for the future of sage
On May 14, 4:32 pm, Fredrik Johansson
wrote:
> It would be nice to have something like this for Sage (including information
> about which library implements what, how generally etc), and not just for
> special functions.
Yeahr, exactly. A good start is the "constructions" manual (maybe
should be
13 matches
Mail list logo
