t of lcalc, my enthusiasm has decreased markedly.
lcalc just happened to be the part that interested me, which is why I have
looked at that in greater depth.
Anne.
On 8 June 2010 20:30, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Anne Driver
> wrote:
> > When building op
When building open-source software, it is not unusual to see a few compiler
warnings - usually deprecated code. There's quite a lot of them in Sage.
But looking at lcalc, the code seems particularly poor, with lots of unused
variables & deprecated code. It does not exactly inspire confidence in Sa
Yes, I stand corrected on that matter.
I still think it is an illogical choice though, to return just the imaginary
part. But I can live with it.
Anne
On 8 June 2010 12:40, Alex Ghitza wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:33:38 +0100, Anne Driver
> wrote:
> > Yes, I did read the docum
+ 32.9350616*I,
> 0.5 + 37.5861782*I, 0.5 + 40.9187190*I, 0.5 +
> 43.3270733*I, 0.5 + 48.0051509*I, 0.5 + 49.7738325*I]
>
> !
>
>
> On Jun 1, 4:13 pm, Anne Driver wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am new to this
Hello,
I am new to this list, and relatively new to Sage. I'm puzzled by the logic
of one part of Sage though.
Although I don't have access to Mathematica at the minute on this computer,
I know if I compute the first zero, I get something like
In[1] = ZetaZero[1] //N (to get a numerical value)
O
