Opened 11 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
#4325 closed defect (wontfix)
CC() fails on Mathematica output
Reported by: | ddrake | Owned by: | was |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix |
Component: | interfaces | Keywords: | mathematica |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Reviewers: | ||
Report Upstream: | Work issues: | ||
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
Using 3.1.2 on sage.math:
sage: mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]') -0.105203133241753451256 + 0.017589014615189905553 I
Now say I want to get a CC element out of that:
sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]')) ------------------------------------------------------------ File "<string>", line 1 -RealNumber('0.105203133241753451256')+RealNumber('0.017589014615189905553')I ^ SyntaxError: unexpected EOF while parsing
It's confused because Mathematica uses a space between the number and I; a workaround is to put in an asterisk:
sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]').replace(' I', '*I')) -0.105203133241753 + 0.0175890146151899*I
I understand that this kind of parsing can get difficult and complicated, but it seems like something we should aim for.
Change History (7)
comment:1 Changed 11 years ago by
comment:2 follow-up: ↓ 4 Changed 11 years ago by
In Mathematica, we can set the output to automatically be wrapped in a certain function. We ought to just write a function that first calls InputForm?.
sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]//InputForm[#,NumberMarks->False]&')) -0.105203133241753 + 0.0175890146151899*I sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[I-1, I], 30]//InputForm[#,NumberMarks->False]&')) -0.190193056011529 - 0.470313413807477*I
I put the NumberMarks?->False option since Sage doesn't know how to deal with the precision information returned from Mathematica. It would be nice if there was a way to use that in constructing Sage objects. My guess is it would be fairly easy in Mathematica to write a function that generates Sage output, given that you easily have access to the full parse tree of the function in Mathematica.
Another way to get rid of the precision information is to set $NumberMarks? = False:
sage: mathematica.eval('$NumberMarks=False') False sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[I-1, I], 30]//InputForm'))-0.190193056011529 - 0.470313413807477*I
We can automatically apply the InputForm? to any printed output by setting the $PrePrint? hook:
sage: mathematica.eval('$NumberMarks=False') False sage: mathematica.eval('$PrePrint = InputForm') InputForm sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[I-1, I], 30]')) -0.190193056011529 - 0.470313413807477*I sage: CC(mathematica.eval('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]')) -0.105203133241753 + 0.0175890146151899*I
comment:3 follow-up: ↓ 5 Changed 11 years ago by
The output of mathematica.eval (or in general FOO.eval) must be the string that *system* outputs. There is absolutely no reason any coercion, e.g., CC(FOO.eval(...)) should ever work. This ticket as is is definitely invalid.
However, it is fair game to want to make something like CC(FOO(...)) work. Note that there is no eval. So this is the only thing that should work:
sage: CC(mathematica('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]'))
Unfortunately, due to stuff not being implemented, this doesn't work either. Another thing that should work is
sage: a = mathematica('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 20]') sage: CC((a.Re(), a.Im()))
It doesn't, because of #4330.
comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 2 Changed 11 years ago by
Replying to jason:
In Mathematica, we can set the output to automatically be wrapped in a certain function. We ought to just write a function that first calls InputForm?.
Those are good ideas. I wish I had known that when I was using Mathematica a lot more! I spent a *lot* of time manually editing wonky output from Mathematica's primitive command line interface.
Replying to was:
The output of mathematica.eval (or in general FOO.eval) must be the string that *system* outputs. There is absolutely no reason any coercion, e.g., CC(FOO.eval(...)) should ever work. This ticket as is is definitely invalid.
Okay, it's no problem if this is an invalid ticket. Looks like #4330 will fix the true problem here.
comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 10 years ago by
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
With #4330 being fixed I'm closing this ticket as fixed. The suggestion given above (was) works now with 3.4.1.rc4:
sage: a = mathematica('N[BesselK[1+I, 2+ 3*I], 30]') sage: CC((a.Re(), a.Im())) -0.105203133241753 + 0.0175890146151899*I
You lose a bit of precision, there, so you can use RealField? and so on:
sage: a.Re() -0.10520313324175345125609254499068 sage: RealField(100)(a.Re()) -0.10520313324175345125609254499 sage: RealField(110)(a.Re()) -0.10520313324175345125609254499070
Since this works now, and my original usage of mathematica.eval
isn't supposed to work, I say this is fixed.
comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by
- Resolution fixed deleted
- Status changed from closed to reopened
This ticket should only be closed when a proper doctest has been added. I skimmed #4330 and did not see such a doctest.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Michael
comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-4.0 to sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
- Resolution set to wontfix
- Status changed from reopened to closed
And to close this it should be "wontfix" or "invalid" depending on taste. I think that since this is bogus/an abuse of eval we don't need a doctest in this case :).
Cheers,
Michael
Here's another problem:
Trying to
CC()
that fails because of the newlines and the>
in the middle. This may be another ticket entirely, so let me know if I should open another.