On Mar 22, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> > I don't think that maintaining another version of Sage is the way to > go at the moment, since many developers have enough on their hands and > little time to implement them. What I think is appropriate is to write > a Sage interface to your favourite physics/engineering/numerical > system, package your interface as an spkg, and announce your spkg on > the sage-devel mailing list. A list of current spkg can be found at > In my mind, what's generally necessary for engineering purposes is a) examples of Sage used for engineering and b) consistency across the various interfaces. Right now, one pretty much has to choose if you're going to work with polynomials or with symbolics. It would be nice if you could take a polynomial you've defined with Pynac, use the fast polynomial routines and go back to the Pynac routines for the other operations. Plus, there hasn't been a way to do integration with the Pynac symbolics. Cheers, Tim. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
