2020-01-22 10:44:58 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2020-01-15 07:00:13 -0500 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |

2020-01-10 05:20:04 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2020-01-01 17:09:44 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2020-01-01 17:09:44 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2019-06-26 00:39:11 -0500 | commented answer | wrapping vector class @john-palmieri it is all clear now. Thank you for your patience. |

2019-06-25 16:25:30 -0500 | commented answer | wrapping vector class @John_Palmieri Actually, (disregard original comment, there was mistake), it doesn't work. I do MWE: Get error: |

2019-06-25 16:13:21 -0500 | commented answer | subclass from a sage vector @Mathmon Please, see here: https://ask.sagemath.org/question/469... |

2019-06-25 16:09:11 -0500 | received badge | ● Commentator |

2019-06-25 16:09:11 -0500 | commented answer | wrapping vector class @John_Palmieri I guess I want rational vectors (to keep it safe). Should I use from sage.structure.element import Vector_rational_dense? |

2019-06-25 16:05:32 -0500 | commented answer | wrapping vector class @John_Palmieri Thank you thank you, you can't believe how long I've been struggling with this. How did you know where to import it from? And when I do w=OneParamSubgroup([1,2]), if it is just the empty wrapper calling Vector.__init__, will it have the same effect as doing vecctor([1,2])? |

2019-06-25 15:15:51 -0500 | commented question | Is it possible to subclass a sage class? Hi, @done_with_fish did you manage to do this? I have no trouble doing it with Python classes, but struggle with Sage classes, see here: https://ask.sagemath.org/question/469... |

2019-06-25 12:42:38 -0500 | received badge | ● Editor (source) |

2019-06-25 12:40:19 -0500 | asked a question | wrapping vector class I am trying to wrap the vector class to add some extra cases, but I am having trouble doing so. This is the code I have: However, I get the following error when running on terminal and the following on the Notebook Any idea of what I am doing wrong? |

2019-06-25 12:27:38 -0500 | asked a question | Creating a module in Sage I am new to Sage, being used to Python and I am having some trouble with adapting. In particular, I am trying to create a 'module' in the Python sense, i.e. some set of classes that I can call with 'import'. When I did this in python in the past, I would create a directory (say /my_module/ in my home) and include a file __'__init____.sage' in that file with a line Then I would have a file 'Submodule1' and 'Submodule2'. In the file 'Submodule 1' I would define 'Class1' and then from a file 'run.py' in home I would write and then I would be able to write to create an object. I find that this is not working in Sage and the only thing I seem to be able to do is write in run.py for each class I want to load. This has many disadvantages, for instance hiding classes from potential users so that they only exist internally. Any suggestions on how to create and import modules in sage? What is the sage way? |

2019-06-24 19:37:32 -0500 | commented question | Updating Sage in Windows 10 @vdelecroix It is not there. I tell you, I have done a search for cygwin and there is not such directory in the whole disk. |

2019-06-24 10:15:05 -0500 | commented question | Updating Sage in Windows 10 @vdelecroix I don't think that is correct. I downloaded bin files here http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ww... and then simply ran the installation file. I do not have cygwin installed on my computer. If sagemath installs cygwin and runs over it, it does it in a completely transparent way. I cannot even find a cygwin folder in my computer. |

2019-06-23 08:21:58 -0500 | commented answer | Testing if the entries of a matrix of rational vectors are actually integers @john_Palimieri all clear, thanks. I got confused by the line "This seems to be a little faster than[...]". |

2019-06-20 10:24:07 -0500 | asked a question | Updating Sage in Windows 10 The Sage Installation Guide Release 8.7 seems to assume that one installs Sage in Windows using Cygwin, in particular regarding upgrading. However, I installed Sage on Windows 10 from the bin files without installing Cygwin at all. How should I update both Sage and the packages? I favour an easy way that does not make me uninstall-reinstall. |

2019-06-20 10:20:00 -0500 | commented answer | Testing if the entries of a matrix of rational vectors are actually integers From your last comparison it seems to me that all(a in ZZ for a in random_matrix(QQ, 200, 200).list()) is the fastest as it takes less ms. Am I missing something? |

2019-06-18 07:39:31 -0500 | commented answer | Testing if the entries of a matrix of rational vectors are actually integers @Juanjo Yes, of course that works, but I was interested in seeing if there was a method of the class matrix to deal with this, just as there is for the class Rational (or its parent, wherever is_rational is). Anyway, it is neat, so I vote up. If nobody replies in a few days I will accept the answer. |

2019-06-18 06:29:39 -0500 | commented answer | Testing if the entries of a matrix of rational vectors are actually integers @FrédéricC If I do that and the matrix has denominators it will give an error 'matrix has denominators so can't change to ZZ.' |

2019-06-18 05:00:50 -0500 | received badge | ● Autobiographer |

2019-06-18 04:58:39 -0500 | asked a question | Testing if the entries of a matrix of rational vectors are actually integers I moved from Python to SageMath because it allows me to deal with natural operations in mathematics without having to reinvent the wheel through typing obvious classes and methods. I also suppose the built-in classes and methods do things in more efficient ways that I could do myself. However, sometimes I find hard to find the right function or class for what I want to do. I have created several matrices using 'matrix' which may have rational or integer numbers (so I use QQ to define them). I want to check which matrices actually have all entries as integers. I know how to do this by looping through all entries of each matrix and calling 'is_integer', but is there an existing method in 'matrix' doing this for me? I could not find one. |

2019-06-04 18:51:34 -0500 | received badge | ● Scholar (source) |

2019-06-04 18:51:32 -0500 | commented answer | Adding elements to a set Thank you. Incidentally, I think that suggest an answer for my last question ('Is there a natural reason to explain why 'add' is not a method of 'Set'?'): if one wants a mathematical notion of set, we want to be able to create 'set of sets' naturally. Now I remember having this problem in Python when dealing with sets of sets: because the set is mutable (and hence not hashable), one has to create a frozen set, and then a set of frozen sets. From that point of view the Sage design is more natural. |

2019-06-04 13:59:23 -0500 | asked a question | set add element I learned Python a long while ago before I decided to get into SageMath for mathematical purposes. I am a bit puzzled that I don't seem to have a way to add an element to a set when using the SageMath definition 'Set()', but there seems to be no problem when doing this using the Python definition 'set()', namely: gives the error whereas gives no problem (notice the difference in capital letter when creating set). I am using the following workaround but it seems rather artificial. Is there no more natural way to proceed? Is there a natural reason to explain why 'add' is not a method of 'Set'? |

2019-06-04 13:58:51 -0500 | asked a question | Adding elements to a set I learned Python a long while ago before I decided to get into SageMath for mathematical purposes. I am a bit puzzled that I don't seem to have a way to add an element to a set when using the SageMath definition 'Set()', but there seems to be no problem when doing this using the Python definition 'set()', namely: gives the error whereas gives no problem (notice the difference in capital letter when creating set). I am using the following workaround but it seems rather artificial. Is there no more natural way to proceed? Is there a natural reason to explain why 'add' is not a method of 'Set'? |

2019-05-31 07:33:55 -0500 | received badge | ● Supporter (source) |

2019-05-14 08:54:40 -0500 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |

2019-05-14 08:54:40 -0500 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2018-05-04 20:11:18 -0500 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

Copyright Sage, 2010. Some rights reserved under creative commons license. Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.