#12449: Improve the way that sage evaluates symbolic functions on basic types
-------------------------------------------------+--------------------------
Reporter: bober | Owner: bober
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.1
Component: symbolics | Resolution:
Keywords: gamma function | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers: Burcin
Erocal, Jonathan Bober
Authors: Jonathan Bober, Burcin Erocal | Merged in:
Dependencies: #4498, #12507, #9130 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+--------------------------
Comment (by jdemeyer):
I think it's better to use `RR` (= `RealField(53)`) or `CC`
(=`ComplexField(53)`) instead of `RDF` or `CDF`. That should give more
consistent results.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12449#comment:22>
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 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-trac?hl=en.
