On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Carl Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 5, 12:07 pm, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Carl Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) Modify sage_eval so that it can process a sequence of statements
followed by an
On Mar 27, 11:13 pm, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it's worth rethiking our _foo_init_ methods a little and allowing
a tiny bit more than a single string that has to eval to the object.
However, it's critical that we don't do something that is at all complicated
or nicely
Here's a nicely overengineered rough proposal.
I didn't comment before, but...
In my opinion this is not over-engineered. This is the canonical way
to do this sort of thing. whole-heartedly support this style and
wish it was in place in other areas, such as the production of latex
On Mar 5, 7:13 pm, Carl Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's a nicely overengineered rough proposal. The idea is to make it
easy to write _sage_init_ methods, and get very nice output; without
worrying much about how hard it is to write the framework. (I would
probably write the framework,
I agree with the choice of _sage_init_. By default this can return
self._repr_(), but should be overridden in cases like matrix.
David
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 1:32 AM, Robert Bradshaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
_sage_init_ sounds like the right solution. The problem is that for
many objects,
On Mar 4, 10:59 am, Jason Grout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This morning I tried to copy a matrix output, edit it, and create a new
matrix. It was frustrating because there seemed to be no way to easily
cut and paste output into input. This afternoon a person I was showing
Sage to also had the
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Carl Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 4, 10:59 am, Jason Grout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This morning I tried to copy a matrix output, edit it, and create a new
matrix. It was frustrating because there seemed to be no way to easily
cut and paste
I like option 2 too. As a single string that example could be
R1 = GF(17); R2 = R1['x,y']; x, y = R2.gens(); 3*x^2*y^3
?
John
On 05/03/2008, Carl Witty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 4, 10:59 am, Jason Grout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This morning I tried to copy a matrix output, edit
Here's the relevant ticket: http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/2387
--Mike
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:44 PM, Nick Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is not general, but if M is your matrix, the code 'matrix(R, m,
n, list(M))' is pretty easy.
Nick
On 4-Mar-08, at 10:59 AM,
This is not general, but if M is your matrix, the code 'matrix(R, m,
n, list(M))' is pretty easy.
Nick
On 4-Mar-08, at 10:59 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
This morning I tried to copy a matrix output, edit it, and create a
new
matrix. It was frustrating because there seemed to be no way to
_sage_init_ sounds like the right solution. The problem is that for
many objects, printing all the information that would make them
reproducible is really ugly. For example, if I have
[1 2]
[3 4]
Is this over the integers, or the rationals, or the integers mod 17?
Or perhaps it's a
11 matches
Mail list logo
