"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On May 21, 7:24 pm, Yi Qiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On May 21, 2007, at 7:18 PM, Brian Harris wrote: >> >> >> >> > Fair enough. A previous discussion led me to believe the goal was for >> > more transparent rings. Have you considered supporting something like >> > the following? >> >> > cos(3).toreal()
Hmm.. there could be cos, cosdeg, sin, sindeg, etc, which are the expected symbolic functions. Then RR(cosdeg(180)) = -1, etc. Is that a bad idea? Nick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
