#9424: numerical evaluation of symbolic sums
-------------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: burcin | Owner: burcin
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: symbolics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------+----------------------------
Changes (by kcrisman):
* type: defect => enhancement
* milestone: sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix => sage-6.3
Comment:
I don't think any of these invalidate the ticket; the point is to extend
the behavior. Why is 1. a problem? This seems like it should be a nice
function to me. See Burcin's reply in the thread:
{{{
> If I leave out the N( )-operator on the last line the block evaluates
> to
>
>
> 1/500*sum(abs(-4*k^2 - 56*k + 329), k, 1, 10)
>
> which can be evaluated in a new inputbox. Why not in one step?
The result returned from maxima uses a symbolic function object created
on the fly. This is quite different from the sum() function
available on the command line, and unfortunately, it doesn't define a
numerical evaluation function, _evalf_().
}}}
Burcin knows this code very well, so I would be surprised if he
misdiagnosed this. But I figure maybe changing to enhancement will
appease everyone :)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/9424#comment:8>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" 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-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
