4. Libsingular is completely broken on 64-bit OS X. Everybody who has
looked at this (me included) is currently stumped. Martin Albrecht hasn't
tried yet. http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5862
I will try to see to it before arriving in Seattle, but my schedule is pretty
packed
On Apr 29, 4:03 am, Martin Albrecht m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de
wrote:
4. Libsingular is completely broken on 64-bit OS X. Everybody who has
looked at this (me included) is currently stumped. Martin Albrecht hasn't
tried yet.http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5862
I will
Hi there,
the discussion below started off-list but we figured it should be on
[sage-devel] instead. I left out a few e-mails from people who didn't
explicitly agree to have their e-mails on [sage-devel].
Daniel:
Yes, sparse LA is definitely the
I believe that my implementation of the basic Gaussian
elimination using Markowitz Pivoting is comparable to Magma's.
How do you measure this? As far as I know Magma does not expose its
sparse linear algebra to the end user.
You are right, but Magma has a sparse matrix type and
On Apr 29, 4:27 am, Martin Albrecht m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de
wrote:
Yes, sparse LA is definitely the main obstacle and yes I'm trying to
implement it myself. I know of the existence of M4RI but I'm interested
in larger fields and also in large systems that require sparse LA.
My
On Apr 28, 8:49 pm, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10229202-76.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/wolfram-alpha-veil-lifted/
Both these sites contain a link to Stephen Wolfram's
presentation at Harvard yesterday:
I have a first draft ready in case anyone wants to offer criticisms or
corrections:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wdj/expository/nsf-eccad2009/
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:43 PM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi:
I just started preparing for a talk next Friday in an
NSF
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a first draft ready in case anyone wants to offer criticisms or
corrections:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wdj/expository/nsf-eccad2009/
On page 1, change
* solved with computers to solved with the
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:11 AM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Apr 29, 4:03 am, Martin Albrecht m...@informatik.uni-bremen.de
wrote:
4. Libsingular is completely broken on 64-bit OS X. Everybody who has
looked at this (me included) is currently stumped. Martin Albrecht
Done. A new version is posted to
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wdj/expository/nsf-eccad2009/
Thanks!
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:42 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a first draft ready in case
Hi!
On Apr 29, 3:42 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a first draft ready in case anyone wants to offer criticisms or
corrections:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wdj/expository/nsf-eccad2009/
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:19 AM, simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Hi!
On Apr 29, 3:42 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a first draft ready in case anyone wants to offer criticisms or
corrections:
Yep. Small, localized fixes is exactly what we want at this stage :)
See #5438 (just a rebase of a positive review) and #5933 (doctests in
primes.py) for other examples of this. I believe there might be a few
other documentation-only patches as well in trac, though perhaps some
have already
Fixed. A new version is posted.
Thanks Simon and William!
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:19 AM, simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Hi!
On Apr 29, 3:42 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:25 AM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a first draft ready
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:20 AM, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On Apr 28, 8:49 pm, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10229202-76.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/wolfram-alpha-veil-lifted/
Both these sites
Example 1:
sage: R = Zmod(101)
sage: R.is_field()
True
sage: R.is_prime_field()
False
as compared to
sage: F = GF(101)
sage: F.is_field()
True
sage: F.is_prime_field()
True
The only one of these I disagree with is that R.is_prime_field()
should return True.
Example 2:
sage: R = Zmod(101)
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 8:43 AM, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
Example 1:
sage: R = Zmod(101)
sage: R.is_field()
True
sage: R.is_prime_field()
False
as compared to
sage: F = GF(101)
sage: F.is_field()
True
sage: F.is_prime_field()
True
The only one of these I
ok. the is_prime_field() is simpler:
sage: search_def(is_prime_field)
rings/finite_field_prime_modn.py:def is_prime_field(self): [just
returns True]
rings/rational_field.py:def is_prime_field(self): [ditto]
rings/ring.pyx:def is_prime_field(self):
This one is the
On Apr 29, 11:06 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:20 AM, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
The QA session includes several pointed
questions surrounding open source and freedom of access
to data. Some folks here might find the responses
On Apr 29, 9:51 am, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On the other hand, I'll happily go on record as saying that I find
Wolfram's explanation of Why You Do Not Usually Need to Know
about Internals personally offensive. You can read that
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:51 AM, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On Apr 29, 11:06 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:20 AM, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
The QA session includes several pointed
questions surrounding open source and freedom of
On Apr 29, 1:18 pm, John H Palmieri jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
One interesting thing from this page, though:
In[7]:= N[Sin[10^50], 20]
Out[7]= -0.78967... (I can't copy and paste from that page, but this
is how the number starts)
In[8] := Sin[10.^50]
Out[8] := 0.669369
Sage doesn't
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM, John H Palmieri
jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 29, 9:51 am, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On the other hand, I'll happily go on record as saying that I find
Wolfram's explanation of Why You Do Not Usually Need to Know
about Internals
William Stein wrote:
Hi,
Maple 13 was released today, I think. The new features page is here:
http://www.maplesoft.com/products/maple/new_features/full_list.aspx
Looking it over, the only overlap with Sage (current or in development
features) seems to be the following:
*
On Apr 29, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Other graph things listed at
http://www.maplesoft.com/products/maple/new_features/academic/math/graph_theory.aspx
* calculate the plane dual graph -- I have code for this that we've
been
using in research. I just need to polish it up and
Tim Lahey wrote:
On Apr 29, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Other graph things listed at
http://www.maplesoft.com/products/maple/new_features/academic/math/graph_theory.aspx
* calculate the plane dual graph -- I have code for this that we've
been
using in research. I just need
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:41 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM, John H Palmieri
jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 29, 9:51 am, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On the other hand, I'll happily go on record as saying that I find
Wolfram's
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:41 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM, John H Palmieri
jhpalmier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 29, 9:51 am, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On the
On Apr 29, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
In that case, I don't see why things should be limited to planar
graphs;
I can certainly draw lots of nonplanar graphs in a tool like you
describe.
I guess we'll have to wait until someone gets a copy and lets us know
what this is.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 1:10 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Maple 13 was released today, I think. The new features page is here:
I wonder if they fixed the 'numbpart' function. This would affect my
most favourite sequence in the OEIS:
On Apr 29, 4:39 pm, Franco Saliola sali...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if they fixed the 'numbpart' function.
It looks like they did.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email
On Apr 30, 2009, at 12:19 AM, Roman Pearce wrote:
On Apr 29, 4:39 pm, Franco Saliola sali...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if they fixed the 'numbpart' function.
It looks like they did.
I wonder every version if they've fixed integration of Heaviside
functions. I know it's been broken for
I was wondering if there is a way of passing a doctest which correctly
raises an exception? I tried the #random comment, but it doesn't pass with
this. I also didn't find anything in the manual at
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/conventions.html?highlight=doctest#documentation-strings
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Jonathan Hanke jonha...@gmail.com wrote:
I was wondering if there is a way of passing a doctest which correctly
raises an exception? I tried the #random comment, but it doesn't pass with
this. I also didn't find anything in the manual at
34 matches
Mail list logo
