[sage-support] Re: decimal expansions of constants

2007-04-17 Thread Timothy Clemans
not log2(10) but log(10,2) {{{ R = RealField(round(log(10,2)*200)) len(str(R(pi))) /// 200 }}} On 4/17/07, Timothy Clemans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm confused about what to do. > > {{{ > R = RealField(round(log2(10)*200)) > len(str(R(pi))) > /// > 42 > }}} > > It would be nice if there was

[sage-support] Re: decimal expansions of constants

2007-04-17 Thread Timothy Clemans
I'm confused about what to do. {{{ R = RealField(round(log2(10)*200)) len(str(R(pi))) /// 42 }}} It would be nice if there was a SAGE way to easily get pi to say 200 binary places or 200 decimal places. maybe: pi.str(2,places=200) On 4/17/07, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/1

[sage-support] Re: decimal expansions of constants

2007-04-17 Thread William Stein
On 4/17/07, Timothy Clemans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://www.sagemath.org/hg/sage-main?f=258cf90b118f;file=sage/functions/constants.py > > "We can obtain floating point approximations to each of these constants > by coercing into the real field with given precision. For example, to > 200

[sage-support] decimal expansions of constants

2007-04-17 Thread Timothy Clemans
http://www.sagemath.org/hg/sage-main?f=258cf90b118f;file=sage/functions/constants.py "We can obtain floating point approximations to each of these constants by coercing into the real field with given precision. For example, to 200 decimal places we have the following: " I have done some tests. R

[sage-support] Re: Sparse Linear Algebra?

2007-04-17 Thread William Stein
Hi Jeff, You should make a sparse matrix by giving a dictionary of (i,j):x entries. Use a list to define a dense matrix and a dictionary to define a sparse matrix. (The error message you get below obviously sucks though, and should be fixed.) On 4/17/07, Jeff Allotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr

[sage-support] Re: Negative time

2007-04-17 Thread David Harvey
On Apr 17, 2007, at 3:44 PM, DanK wrote: > > Hi, > > for low p the computations are no problem and the time shown in the > results seemed to be correct. But by larger p around 10 it takes > about 5 to 8 hours on the wall clock and the results seem tob be > correct, but the time is negative.

[sage-support] Re: Negative time

2007-04-17 Thread DanK
Hi, for low p the computations are no problem and the time shown in the results seemed to be correct. But by larger p around 10 it takes about 5 to 8 hours on the wall clock and the results seem tob be correct, but the time is negative. Daniel Köhl On Apr 17, 1:02 pm, David Harvey <[EMAIL P

[sage-support] Re: installing SAGE

2007-04-17 Thread William Stein
On 4/17/07, Randy LeVeque <> wrote: > > Hi William, > > I just tried installing SAGE on a MacBook and when I click on the SAGE icon > I get the message >There is no default application specified to open the document "sage" > and a "choose application" menu. You should then select Terminal as

[sage-support] Re: Negative time

2007-04-17 Thread David Harvey
On Apr 17, 2007, at 6:38 AM, DanK wrote: > > Nobody any idea? Or perhaps another command to mesure the time the > algorithm used? I'm curious; how long did the computation actually take? Are we talking seconds? minutes? weeks? david --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To

[sage-support] Re: Negative time

2007-04-17 Thread DanK
Nobody any idea? Or perhaps another command to mesure the time the algorithm used? Daniel Köhl --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more option