Le dimanche 7 juillet 2013 10:39:30 UTC+2, vdelecroix a écrit :
> > Cool! It looks nice. How do you intend to define a manifold: numerically > (via fine triangulations) or via symbolic expressions? Both? > > At the moment, a manifold is mostly defined as a set of charts with the associated transition maps, the latter being given by symbolic expressions. But why not adding the possibility to define a manifold numerically as you mention ? > Are you aware of #9439 (hyperbolic geometry) and #10132 (surfaces embedded > in R^3) which are somewhat related? > > Thanks for pointing these two packages; they are definitevely relevant to our project. I did not know #9439 and will give a look. Regarding #10132, it differs from SageManifolds in various points: - the chart on the surface is fixed, as well as the chart in the embedding space (R^3), while in SageManifolds various charts can be used on the same manifold; also various vector frames can be used to expand tensors, not only coordinate bases. - it implements extrinsic geometry, which SageManifolds does not do yet (but should do soon) (cf. Joris Vankerschaver's message). Eric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
