Thanks -- looks interesting On Monday, May 6, 2019 at 9:41:36 AM UTC-4, kcrisman wrote: > > > > On Sunday, May 5, 2019 at 10:31:39 AM UTC-4, David Joyner wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 9:23 AM Meem <[email protected] <javascript:>> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> (Not sure if this is the correct forum for this question). >>> >>> When I don't have access to paper and/or a large work surface (for >>> example on a coach seat in an airplane): I try to compose my proofs using >>> LaTeX. >>> >>> So I copy the previous line -- cross out terms -- perform additional >>> manipulations and continue till I hit a wall or finish the proof. >>> >>> I'm half decent at LaTeX, but the syntax is so verbose that it becomes >>> tiring. >>> >>> I am thinking of using a more compact representation with some possible >>> algebraic support from the underlying system. >>> >>> I've been (briefly) checking out Sage and am delighted that I can >>> convert stuff to LaTeX. >>> >>> So I guess my question has the following parts: >>> >>> 1. Is Sage suitable for writing proofs? >>> >>> 2. Does it have any facilities to keep the arguments/steps in a proof >>> format -- kind of like in LaTeX there is a proof typesetting option? >>> >>> >>> > Another open-source option you may find more congenial to your needs is > Lurch - http://lurchmath.org >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-edu" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-edu. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-edu/cb690b79-58d0-4993-9305-5c069367bbc3%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
