Tnks Rob. Indeed better.
A related question:
sage: [var('t'+str(i), latex_name="\\tau_"+str(i),domain='positive')
for i in range(1,3)]
[t1, t2]
sage: latex(t1)
\tau_1
sage: assumptions()
[]
sage: assume(t1>0,t2>0)
sage: assumptions()
[t1 > 0, t2 > 0]
Why?
Roland
On 25 feb, 21:38, Rob Beezer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Is this better?
>
> sage: [var('b'+str(i), latex_name="\\beta_"+str(i),domain='real') for
> i in range(4)]
> [b0, b1, b2, b3]
> sage: latex(b3)
> \beta_3
>
> Rob
>
> On Feb 25, 2:08 am, Rolandb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > Is a more compact declaration possible / supported?
>
> > var('b0',latex_name="\\beta_0",domain='real')
> > var('b1',latex_name="\\beta_1",domain='real')
> > var('b2',latex_name="\\beta_2",domain='real')
> > var('b3',latex_name="\\beta_3",domain='real')
> > var('t1',latex_name="\\tau_1",domain='positive')
> > var('t2',latex_name="\\tau_2",domain='positive')
>
> > Thanks in advance!
>
> > Roland
--
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-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
