Thanks a lot to both of you for the replies.
On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 10:24:33 PM UTC-7, VInay Wagh wrote:
>
> Yes, this is not yet implemented in Singular yet. Although GTZ algorithm
> gives error whereas SY algorithm clearly mentions "Not implemented".
>
> If you are interested in char 0, an
Possible hint:
I did not check Latex().eval() code but probably it uses temporary random
filenames to store the object to the file and then to compile it and that's
why there is no fixed order at output (maybe filename alphabetic order).
Pedro
Quinta-feira, 5 de Abril de 2012 17:32:59 UTC+1,
Is there a way to build subfields of finite fields that will behave as
subfields?
For example, a finite field of order 3^6 will have proper subfields of
order 3^1, 3^2, 3^3. The first is not too interesting and can be recovered
with the .prime_subfield() method. I can easily build the set of
Ack! I found this thread while looking for progress on 3D animation, and
didn't notice that it's *two years old*. Anyway, I am indeed thinking of
working on this.
On Saturday, April 7, 2012 4:41:43 PM UTC-4, Niles wrote:
>
> I've been thinking about working on basic 3D animations for Sage; I
I've been thinking about working on basic 3D animations for Sage; I haven't
yet found an open ticket either. On AskSage, I gave an example showing how
to hack the current animation functionality to animate 3D plots:
http://ask.sagemath.org/question/1275/interact-3d-plotpolyhedron?answer=1999#19
Hola,
I was wondering about following eerie behavior of "solve" function:
On the one hand, "force" value of "to_poly_solve" option seems to be more
powerful as for periodicity of solutions:
sage: solve(tan(x)==1,x,to_poly_solve=True)
[x == 1
Thanks a lot, Dmitrii!
It works for me now. (Actually for quite some time, but now I can happily
report, that
compared to cvxopt that I was using before, using csdp is about 10-times
faster!)
I didn't know about sage -sh , that is a very useful trick (perhaps it
should
be documented more, or
On 7 April 2012 01:14, Maarten Derickx wrote:
> Does executing:
>
> import foo
>
> give what you want or is your problem different?
import foo doesn't do much, as foo/__init__.py is empty. I have
adopted the Sage-like behaviour of having an "all.py" file which has
"from bar import *" statements.
