Ok, I had to make a huge effort to accept this, but it's more clear now.
One last question: Why RDF does not incorporate this feature? because it
comes from the GSL library, that is an independent project? or because its
precision is known a priori, like the float type in Python?
On Monday, Oc
Yes, I know Vincent, thank you, but this would complicate my code
unnecessarily.
I used Samuel idea. But I still think that the extra trailing zeros have no
reason to exist.
On Monday, October 6, 2014 1:08:23 PM UTC-3, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> Hi João,
>
> If you want precise control on the outpu
On 2014-10-06 18:03, João Alberto wrote:
Is this a correct behavior of Sage?
It's a feature, not a bug. The reason is that the number of digits gives
an idea about the precision of the number. Compare
sage: RealField(20)(1)
1.
sage: RealField(100)(1)
1.
If both
Hi João,
If you want precise control on the output, you might use the python
formatting (see
https://docs.python.org/2/library/string.html#formatstrings)
sage: x = RR(pi)
sage: print x
3.14159265358979
sage: print "{:.3}".format(x)
3.1
sage: print "{:.5}".format(x)
3.141
But perhaps it is not an
I am plotting some graphs, but the plot becomes cluttered because of
the long labels. The labels are result of a conversion from a Real
number to a string. The problem here is that Sage is not consistent
with Python, as shown in the example below.
Python:
>>> multiplier = [1.0e0, 1.0e1, 1.0e2]
>>>
