Jason Grout wrote:
> David Joyner wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>> So I need to implement a .jacobian() method for SR^n, plus .arguments()
>>> and .variables(). Or is this the right place for these things? I guess
>>> that's why I'm asking the
David Joyner wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>
> ...
>
>
>> So I need to implement a .jacobian() method for SR^n, plus .arguments()
>> and .variables(). Or is this the right place for these things? I guess
>> that's why I'm asking these questions.
>
>
> I thi
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
...
>
> So I need to implement a .jacobian() method for SR^n, plus .arguments()
> and .variables(). Or is this the right place for these things? I guess
> that's why I'm asking these questions.
I think you are proposing to create a new
David Joyner wrote:
> Maybe this?
>
>
> sage: V = VectorSpace(SR, 2)
> sage: x,y = var('x,y')
> sage: f = V([x+y,x-x*y])
> sage: f(2,3)
> (5, -4)
>
Okay, that makes the most sense to me, at least how we have things set
up now. However, it's not quite natural yet. f is not a map there,
it'
Maybe this?
sage: V = VectorSpace(SR, 2)
sage: x,y = var('x,y')
sage: f = V([x+y,x-x*y])
sage: f(2,3)
(5, -4)
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
> What is the best way to deal with symbolic functions from R^n to R^m? A
> symbolic vector? Note some of the following ways th
