On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 5:44:59 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> Is it easy to actually do that?
>
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21391
This catches add,mul,pow which is sufficient IMHO to communicate the issue.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On 31/08/16 02:36, Ralf Stephan wrote:
On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 5:45:16 PM UTC+2, vdelecroix wrote:
sage: x = SR.variable(domain = GF(3))
sage: n = SR.variable(domain = ZZ)
This is good design(TM). The usage however duplicates
Sage's polynomial rings,so why burden calculus with that?
On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 5:45:16 PM UTC+2, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> sage: x = SR.variable(domain = GF(3))
> sage: n = SR.variable(domain = ZZ)
>
This is good design(TM). The usage however duplicates
Sage's polynomial rings, so why burden calculus with that?
The only other usage I can think of
In earlier times of Pynac, ie GiNaC was and is certainly including
polynomial and pos.char. manipulations. I do not claim historical
correctness wrt Sage. Thanks for correction.
Jeroen, do you have a tricky counterexample?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gr
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> First of all, your opinon is more valuable than others since you are the
> maintainer of Pynac.
Perhaps my opinion is also worth something since I made up the name
"Pynac" and wrote the first versi
On 2016-08-30 17:28, Ralf Stephan wrote:
I propose to make it an error
to mix elements of rings with positive characteristics (or symbolic Mod)
and symbolic variables.
Is it easy to actually do that?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" gro
Hi Ralf,
First of all, your opinon is more valuable than others since you are the
maintainer of Pynac.
That being said, the constraint specification of symbolic variables in
Sage is really poor. Ideally, we should be able to have symbolic
computation more tightly linked to Sage parents. It s
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> As you know Pynac provides symbolic computation. In earlier times
> this included polynomial manipulation and other things where Sage
> has now dedicated and consistent algebraic structures.
Can you clarify? Sage had and used "dedicated and
As you know Pynac provides symbolic computation. In earlier times
this included polynomial manipulation and other things where Sage
has now dedicated and consistent algebraic structures. Pynac nowaday
is mostly calculus. For this reason, and because I'm tired of trying to fix
things that belong in
