I'm relying on the fact that __getattr__ is only called if the attribute is
missing from the matrix class. I was of the opinion that this would
completely avoid raising an AttributeError in the first place. This
(should?) mean that the currently defined simplify_ methods on the matrices
will
Sorry, all the suggestions I've put below are for proposal one.
Joal Heagney
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
Should have noted that this was for proposal one.
I kinda prefer it to proposal two myself - will be almost invisible in use.
Joal Heagney
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Hah hah. This get's close to desirable behaviour in pure python.
class Test:
def __init__(self,seq):
self.seq = seq
def __repr__(self):
return Test(%s) % self.seq
def apply_map(self,function):
newseq = map(function,self.seq)
return Test(newseq)
def
My current path of research involves giving the Matrix class a __getattr__
method with argument *missing_method*, that returns a callable object. The
callable object then returns the matrix result of .apply_map(lambda x:
getattr(x,*missing_method*))
Still having some fun ironing out the
Hi Joal,
On 26 Jan., 08:06, ancienthart joalheag...@gmail.com wrote:
My current path of research involves giving the Matrix class a __getattr__
method with argument *missing_method*, that returns a callable object. The
callable object then returns the matrix result of .apply_map(lambda x:
Eeeeggg.
Working on it. I'm currently investigating using getters and setters to pull
attributes from matrix or it's contents.
My current idea looks something like this:
def map(self, function):
try:
logic to return self.apply_map(function)
except
*sigh* Which is why I put the comment about how it was likely I'd missed
something in the documentation. Nice to know that I'm at least right about
that. :P
Hmmm. My matrix is based on SR (Symbolic Ring), which doesn't have any
simplify methods, which suggests my idea of exposing element
This tip, which seems the most effective and least likely to blow up, has
made it to the following blog.
http://doxdrum.wordpress.com/2011/01/22/sage-tip-simplifying-a-matrix/
So is it possible that this could become an approach to matrices, either
automagically, or by a smarter map function?
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:19 PM, ancienthart joalheag...@gmail.com wrote:
This tip, which seems the most effective and least likely to blow up, has
made it to the following blog.
http://doxdrum.wordpress.com/2011/01/22/sage-tip-simplifying-a-matrix/
So is it possible that this could become an
Since several objects have these defined as methods, would the following
approach work?
sage: D
[-(e^3 + 2)/(e^3 - 1) + (2*e^3 + 1)/(e^3 - 1) 1]
[ 2 0]
I then defined the following function:
def mysimplify(obj):
try:
A possible approach for my proposed (mega) simplify method is outlined
below.
Since several objects have these defined as methods, would the following
approach work?
sage: D
[-(e^3 + 2)/(e^3 - 1) + (2*e^3 + 1)/(e^3 - 1) 1]
[ 2
On 1/21/11 3:19 AM, ancienthart wrote:
A possible approach for my proposed (mega) simplify method is outlined
below.
Since several objects have these defined as methods, would the following
approach work?
sage: D
[-(e^3 + 2)/(e^3 - 1) + (2*e^3 + 1)/(e^3 - 1) 1]
[ 2 0]
I then defined the
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:16 AM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 19, 8:24 am, ancienthart joalheag...@gmail.com wrote:
Attempting to use this on my matrix, I end up with the following results (D
is my matrix):
I personally wish that sage simplify functions worked as follows:
More important is the option to apply a lot of things to a matrix.
Simon's got the right idea (lambda functions) for what you want to
do. But we should make this easier. My guess is that even the
'magic' decorator for turning methods into functions wouldn't help
here, and that is too
Attempting to use this on my matrix, I end up with the following results (D
is my matrix):
D.apply_map(simplify_full)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
File _sage_input_61.py, line 10, in module
exec compile(u'open(___code___.py,w).write(# -*- coding:
On Jan 19, 8:24 am, ancienthart joalheag...@gmail.com wrote:
Attempting to use this on my matrix, I end up with the following results (D
is my matrix):
I personally wish that sage simplify functions worked as follows:
simplify_rational and simplify_trig work as currently implemented.
On 1/15/11 4:21 PM, Ivan Andrus wrote:
On Jan 15, 2011, at 10:13 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Ivan Andrusdarthand...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps Matrix (and other classes) should have a method .map() that does this,
They already have an .apply_map() method which
Hello,
Any chance that we can add simplify_full on matrices? So that each
element is simplified if possible?
/1/ I suppose you know the map function that operate over each term of a
list.
map (lambda x: 3*x, [1,2,3]) # computes [3,6,9]
# you can replace 3*x by the function
Hello,
Any chance that we can add simplify_full on matrices? So that each element
is simplified if possible?
/1/ I suppose you know the map function that operate over each term of a list.
map (lambda x: 3*x, [1,2,3]) # computes [3,6,9]
# you can replace 3*x by the function
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Ivan Andrus darthand...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps Matrix (and other classes) should have a method .map() that does this,
They already have an .apply_map() method which does this.
--Mike
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To
On Jan 15, 2011, at 10:13 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Ivan Andrus darthand...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps Matrix (and other classes) should have a method .map() that does
this,
They already have an .apply_map() method which does this.
And that is why you should
22 matches
Mail list logo
