2021-01-15 18:37:16 +0200 | received badge | ● Teacher (source) |

2021-01-15 18:37:16 +0200 | received badge | ● Self-Learner (source) |

2020-04-09 09:09:32 +0200 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2019-05-22 17:44:04 +0200 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2016-03-25 22:31:46 +0200 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2014-11-07 12:11:58 +0200 | received badge | ● Famous Question (source) |

2014-07-16 20:02:53 +0200 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |

2014-04-03 01:55:44 +0200 | received badge | ● Notable Question (source) |

2013-11-08 17:11:13 +0200 | received badge | ● Popular Question (source) |

2013-11-06 07:46:53 +0200 | commented answer | [style] Choose between multiple inheritance I actually want to implement Askey-Wilson polynomials (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Askey%E2%80%93Wilson_polynomials), but I want to give the polynomials some extra functions so that you can do something like: Askey_Wilson(n, z, a, b, c, d, q).three_term() and you get a triple with the three term recurrence relation. So if n is an integer I can use Expression, but if n is a variable I want to use an other object. Your answer does work, except that I don't want to call askey_wilson.I all the time, but just without the I. |

2013-11-03 14:22:42 +0200 | asked a question | [style] Choose between multiple inheritance Dear Sage people, I want to create a new (mathematical) object that sometimes is an Expression and sometimes a SymbolicFunction, depending on the arguments. You can think of this for example like $f(a, b, t) = \int_0^t a^b e^{-x^2} dx$. For special values of $t$ I would like to see it as an Expression ($t=0$ or $t=\infty$), but in all other cases I want it to be a BuiltinFunction (or something alike). In Sage I can do something like: Is it possible to combine these three things into one class? So I want to create a class which is sometimes an Expression and sometimes an much more abstract class, is this possible? Best, Noud
But now every time I want to know the explicit value of the Askey-Wilson polynomials I have to call askey_wilson.I. I want to get rid of the I. |

2012-12-01 16:00:20 +0200 | received badge | ● Editor (source) |

2012-12-01 15:59:51 +0200 | answered a question | Square root in FunctionField I found the answer myself. Instead of using AA you should use the SR (Symbolic Ring). An example: This SR ring is still a bit of a mystery to me, but it seems to work. |

2012-11-29 08:39:45 +0200 | asked a question | Square root in FunctionField Hi, I'm working with $q$-functions and I would like to define a free algebra over the algebraic field with an extra parameter $q$ for which I can also take roots i.e. I would like to do something like this The function FunctionAlgebra is not the correct function, since it only includes (integer) powers of $q$. Is it possible to extend this FunctionAlgebra to something where sums of powers of $q$ also have roots? Or is there an other function for which I can do this? Best, Noud |

2012-10-27 05:10:02 +0200 | marked best answer | Check that variable is integer I don't think there's a method that queries the assumptions data. You can write a simple function to test this using the output of The Beware that the only subsystem of Sage that respects (or takes account of) symbolic assumptions is Maxima. So some symbolic operations will "know" about the assumptions (the ones that use Maxima under the hood) and some won't. |

2012-10-27 05:09:59 +0200 | commented answer | Check that variable is integer I agree with you that it is indeed quite hard and maybe even impossible to do it in a nice way. Let me see if I can bury it in a new method of the symbolic expression type. This will give me some more insight in how Sage works. I'll mark your solution as the solution, since it is obvious a solution. ;) Thank you! |

2012-10-26 03:49:23 +0200 | commented answer | Check that variable is integer Sorry to say this to you, but I think this is an extremely ugly solution. Is there an other solution to give a variable properties like being positive, or having real part, etc. So I might should have asked, is there a way to give variables extra properties, like being real, having real part, being imaginary, etc? |

2012-10-24 17:35:45 +0200 | asked a question | Check that variable is integer Dear Sage, I define the following variable How do I check that is variable is an integer? The following doese not seem to work in sage 5.2. How should I check the assumption that a is an integer? Best, Noud |

2012-10-10 08:20:46 +0200 | commented answer | Weird behavior BuiltinFunction Nice! Thank you for this fix! |

2012-10-10 08:20:21 +0200 | received badge | ● Scholar (source) |

2012-10-10 08:20:21 +0200 | marked best answer | Weird behavior BuiltinFunction Some debug output after the lines pasted in the question: Note that the function in use is not qPochhammer(3). ATM, we expect each BuiltinFunction to be instantiated once. In other words, each class corresponds to exactly one symbolic function. This is evident in the check on line 827 of Patch waiting for review on trac ticket #13586. |

2012-10-10 08:20:19 +0200 | received badge | ● Supporter (source) |

2012-10-05 07:22:43 +0200 | asked a question | Weird behavior BuiltinFunction Dear Sage, I'm trying to program qPochhammer functions which can interact with sage in a nice way. However I encounter some weird behavior of these new BuiltinFunctions. This is what I made: from sage.symbolic.function import BuiltinFunction Now I try the following the the sage console: Can someone explain to my why I get a RuntimeError and how to solve this? Best regards, Noud |

2012-03-23 03:12:08 +0200 | commented question | Non-commutative ring with inverses Thank you Simon! I'm looking forward to an answer on the sage-combinat-devel mailinglist. |

2012-03-22 07:06:24 +0200 | commented question | Non-commutative ring with inverses I tried to do this, but I do not know how to make the generators of infinite order. I define `FreeAlgebra(QQ, 2n, 'x')` and define with `FreeAlgebraQuotient` relations $x_i x_{2n-i} = 1 = x_{2n-i} x_i$. But how do you define that $x_i^k = x_i^k$ (this looks a bit ambiguous)? In the examples in this reference everything has finite order. |

2012-03-21 19:32:06 +0200 | received badge | ● Nice Question (source) |

2012-03-21 14:09:01 +0200 | received badge | ● Student (source) |

2012-03-21 08:26:28 +0200 | asked a question | Non-commutative ring with inverses Hello Sage, I would like to make a ring over $\mathbb{Q}$ with $n$ variables which are non-commutative and also include their inverses. So I want to generate the free algebra over $\mathbb{Q}$ with generates $x_1, x_2, ..., x_n$ and $x_1^{-1}, x_2^{-1}, ..., x_n^{-1}$. How can I do this? Best regards, Noud |

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.