On Jan 20, 4:24 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> Stan Schymanski wrote:
> > I fell for this several times, and didn't see the error here, either.
> > Could either the syntax be made consistent or the error message made
> > more informative? Now that I think about it, I would probably prefer the
> > latt
Stan Schymanski wrote:
I fell for this several times, and didn't see the error here, either.
Could either the syntax be made consistent or the error message made
more informative? Now that I think about it, I would probably prefer the
latter, as it would not break any code and it does not seem
I fell for this several times, and didn't see the error here, either.
Could either the syntax be made consistent or the error message made
more informative? Now that I think about it, I would probably prefer the
latter, as it would not break any code and it does not seem logical to
declare the
On Jan 19, 9:37 pm, kcrisman wrote:
> On Jan 19, 3:16 pm, jeff788 wrote:
>
> > I am trying to evaluate a definite integral using SAGE and am getting
> > some errors. I have evaluated the same integrals using Mathematica
> > without a problem. Here is the integral in question:
>
> > integral(0.2
jeff788 wrote:
I am trying to evaluate a definite integral using SAGE and am getting
some errors. I have evaluated the same integrals using Mathematica
without a problem. Here is the integral in question:
integral(0.29832198400/((13.12333*X + 1)^2*
(15.74667*X + 1)),(X,0.05
On Jan 19, 3:16 pm, jeff788 wrote:
> I am trying to evaluate a definite integral using SAGE and am getting
> some errors. I have evaluated the same integrals using Mathematica
> without a problem. Here is the integral in question:
>
> integral(0.29832198400/((13.12333*X + 1)^2*
> (
