Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation

> > Yes, I agree that some detailed books on Sage in Russian can > substitute the Russian help. Maybe having some consistent books even > better. In such case, what is the actual situation with the books on > Sage? > > Regards, >Vladimir > I think that there is some nice book on Sage in Frenc

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation

Hello! On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 23:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Andrey Novoseltsev wrote: > > Usefulness of this work is somewhat questionable as we will not be > able to maintain these translations and it may lead to discrepancies > between detailed documentation and actual commands. In addition, it > becom

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:58:10 -0700 (PDT) kcrisman wrote: > See http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9378 - it is nearly > ready to go! Big thanks to Harald Schilly for turning it into the > proper format. > Please excuse me for posting such unnecessary things, but I've just seen that I'

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:58:10 -0700 (PDT) kcrisman wrote: > > On Jun 14, 9:14 am, v...@ukr.net wrote: > >   Hello! > > > >   By the way, I remember that some months ago a Russian translation > > of Sage Tutorial had been ready. I personally edited it and > > formatted for Sage documentation syste

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation

Merhaba Ege, On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:01:44 -0700 (PDT) Ege Sertçetin wrote: > I now translated it. Does the person I will show it have to be a > developer of Sage? I'd be happy to review the translation. When you open a ticket [1] add me (user name: burcin) to the CC list please. [1] http://sa

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation

Hi Ege, On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Ege Sertçetin wrote: > I now translated it. Cool! > Does the person I will show it have to be a > developer of Sage? Preferably, but not strictly required to be a current Sage developer. You should open a trac ticket, post your translation to that tic

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: > On 26 Apr., 19:23, Robert Bradshaw > wrote: >> On Apr 25, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: >> >> > On 25 Apr., 17:11, Gonzalo Tornaria wrote: >> >> Also, the "== doesn't fail" part seems to force this, since it would >> >> be ev

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Apr 25, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: On 25 Apr., 17:11, Gonzalo Tornaria wrote: Also, the "== doesn't fail" part seems to force this, since it would be even more awkward to hide the coercion failure. See my last two posts. In addition, Sage behaves different to Python in many

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Apr 25, 2010, at 7:13 AM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: On 25 Apr., 08:10, Robert Bradshaw wrote: On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: Though e.g. C and C++ do have automatic (or implicit) conversion, it is usually referred to as (different kinds of) type *casts*. C++ does have a

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: > On 25 Apr., 17:11, Gonzalo Tornaria wrote: >> I'd rather have >> >>     sage: 1/3 == GF(3)(1) >> >> raise a ZeroDivisionError, and > > I'd prefer TypeError (or coercion error, "incompatible types", not yet > existent I guess) I think you

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: > "[...] A coercion from one parent to another must be defined on the > whole domain, and always succeeds. As it may be invoked implicitly, it > should be obvious and natural (in both the mathematically rigorous and > colloquial sense of th

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Apr 23, 2010, at 7:07 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote: On 23 Apr., 11:10, Simon King wrote: On Apr 22, 10:46 pm, "Georg S. Weber" wrote: I think I like "Wandlung" as the common umbrella term for both "coercion" ("Umwandlung", I like that, too) and "conversion" (for the latter I'd propose:

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

kcrisman schrieb: PS: If you are still in doubt, please, please do not use Wikipedia for any proof! Wikipedia is only good for to make a religion. Please better ask a computer scientist, best working in the field of computation, not hardware! On your university there should be a collection of tha

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

William Stein schrieb: On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:15 AM, bb > wrote: Simon King schrieb: Hi! On Apr 23, 2:05 pm, bb mailto:bblo...@arcor.de>> wrote: ... The second passage I found was at http://www.sagemath.o

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:15 AM, bb wrote: > Simon King schrieb: > > Hi! >> >> On Apr 23, 2:05 pm, bb wrote: >> >> >>> ... >>> The second passage I found was at >>> >>> http://www.sagemath.org/doc/tutorial/programming.html >>> >>> ... When comparing objects of different types in Sage, in most

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

Simon King schrieb: Hi! On Apr 23, 2:05 pm, bb wrote: ... The second passage I found was at http://www.sagemath.org/doc/tutorial/programming.html ... When comparing objects of different types in Sage, in most cases Sage tries to find a canonical coercion of both objects to a common parent

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Translation of "coercion"

Simon King schrieb: Hi Georg, On Apr 22, 10:46 pm, "Georg S. Weber" wrote: I think I like "Wandlung" as the common umbrella term for both "coercion" ("Umwandlung", I like that, too) and "conversion" (for the latter I'd propose: "Verwandlung" --- but "Konversion" might do as well, and would