Thank you! I have a lot to learn about Sage, I can see. Will study &
experiment with recn.
In most cases, an integer exponent should look like "2" and not
"2.0000000", don't you think? So I guess I would not n() the exponents.
I have just started using Sage and SMC with some online classes. It's great
to:
- check work with units of measure
- take notes that look like math rather than COBOL (+1 typeset_mode)
- do symbolic and numerical calculations in those same typeset notes
I'm hooked. :-)
On Friday, June 6, 2014 6:53:18 PM UTC-5, Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> On Thursday, June 5, 2014 6:32:42 PM UTC-7, Hal Snyder wrote:
>>
>> IIs there a simple way to take n() of things without getting into the
>> following?
>>
> You could automate the application, but you'll quickly see you need to be
> a bit careful:
>
> #unfortunately, the operators returned for sums and products of multiple
> #arguments are callable, but don't accept multiple arguments, so we need to
> #do a little surgery ourselves (borrow the functionality from elsewhere):
>
> opdict = {
> operator.mul : sage.interfaces.maxima_lib.mul_vararg,
> operator.add : sage.interfaces.maxima_lib.add_vararg,
> }
> def recn(e):
> try:
> return n(e)
> except TypeError:
> pass
> op=e.operator()
> if op:
> if op in opdict:
> op = opdict[op]
> return op(*[recn(c) for c in e.operands()])
> else:
> return e
> --
>
> This now works, a little bit:
>
> sage: recn(area)
> 21.5161409036487*meter^2.00000000000000
>
> As you can see, the exponent in meter^2 was also numerified. Perhaps you
> didn't want that?
>
> Nonetheless, a recursive n(..) method seems eminently reasonable and
> desirable to implement.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" 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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
