SageMath also has a multivariate inequality solver IIRC. `*` is repeated multiplication (exponentiation) in Python. If you require preprocessing to translate ^ to *, you don't have valid Python code that'll run with any other interpreter.
Is it easier to import SageMath from a plain Python script now; with conda repackaging?
Type promotion in Python:
from rational import Rational
assert Rational(1, 4) / 2 == Rational(1, 8)
from __future__ import division
assert 3 / 2 == 1.5
assert 3 // 2 == 1
assert 4 / 2 == 2.0
assert 3 / 2 == 1.5
assert 3.0 / 2 == 1.5
assert 3 // 2 == 1
assert 4 / 2 == 2.0Yes, it's easy. It was always possible, since fortunately none of the Sage library implementation uses the Sage preprocessor. You could always do "sage -python" and you get the Python interpreter that Sage uses, and can import Sage via "import sage.all". Somebody asked me exactly this question at a colloquium talk I gave on Sage yesterday, and here's my answer/demo:
https://youtu.be/dy792FEh1ns?t=1140
In the demo, I use a Jupyter kernel that runs the Python included in Sage-9.8.
Disclaimer: I created the Sage preparser long ago, in order to make Sage more palatable to mathematicians. In particular, it was inspired by audience feedback during a live demo I did at PyCon 2005.
I should add that this is an interesting chunk of Python code, and we've always planned to separate it out from Sage as a separate library than could be used with Sympy, etc.
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/52a81cbd161ef4d5895325...
It does a surprising number of little clever things we realized would be a good idea over years, and it has some neat ideas from various Python PEP's like [1..10] that were rejected from Python, but are very useful when expressing mathematics. It's also annoying when you just want to format your code using prettier (say), and you can't because Sage isn't Python. :-(
Is there a %%sage IPython magic method that passes code through the preparse.py input transform?
As another example, I googled some project Euler solutions in Mathematica and (pure Python) and found this: https://www.nayuki.io/page/project-euler-solutions. Compared to the pure Python solutions, the Mathematica code is typically much smaller. Of course this is not Sympy, but a lot of the Python syntax carries over to SymPy as well.
for a_k in 1 to n:
for a_(k-1) in 1 to a_k:
....
A note to a bypassing reader, if you want to try Mathematica, and not sure if you would stay with it, don't go for a desktop license. Get a Raspberry Pi instead. Mathematica comes free for Raspberry!
Hardly surprising, is it? As someone with more experience in Python, it would likely be the opposite for me.
I‘m not sure if that’s a good thing, considering how nice and well-suited to maths the Wolfram language is.
I get that you need to learn yet another language, but you would also need to learn the particularities of Sagemath and/or the libraries it builds on.
There's latex display feature when in notebook. It looks good, can even have symbolical matrices and display them as you would've expected.
It's on par with Wolfram notebook, but you get to program in python instead of some propietary language.
If you got some really long formula, it's easier to see you got it correctly by displaying it symbolically in latex.
They have other things to smooth out the parts of python which are annoying in math, like exponentiation works with ^, and dividing integers returns a rational number instead of floating point or an integer.