Thanks for the news, William. I will hold off on this chain rule
business till the new symbolics arrive.
Alex
On Apr 24, 3:43 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Alex Raichev wrote:
>
> > Hmm, implementing the chain rule is trickier than i thought. My
> > straightforw
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Alex Raichev wrote:
>
> Hmm, implementing the chain rule is trickier than i thought. My
> straightforward plan of attack was to write a function that
> differentiates a symbolic expression as usual but when it comes to a
> composition f o g, it uses the chain rul
Hmm, implementing the chain rule is trickier than i thought. My
straightforward plan of attack was to write a function that
differentiates a symbolic expression as usual but when it comes to a
composition f o g, it uses the chain rule and returns the appropriate
entry of the matrix (Df o g)Dg. P
Woops, that ain't right: 'write'.
On Apr 23, 1:43 pm, Alex Raichev wrote:
> Never mind. I'll just right a short recursive function. It's easy
> enough.
>
> Alex
>
> On Apr 23, 11:10 am, Alex Raichev wrote:
>
> > Hi all:
>
> > Do any of you know how to get Sage to use the chain rule and expand
Never mind. I'll just right a short recursive function. It's easy
enough.
Alex
On Apr 23, 11:10 am, Alex Raichev wrote:
> Hi all:
>
> Do any of you know how to get Sage to use the chain rule and expand
> the derivative of a composition involving one or two callable symbolic
> functions? Here
