I'm working on tut.tex in sage 1.5 alpha12. I've made several
fixes but have run into some questions.
1. The command
R = ElementaryFunctionRing(QQ,"t"); R
doesn't work. Did you remove that module?
2. The command
sage: MS = MatrixSpace(GF(7),2,2)
sage: g = MS([[5, 1], [4, 1]])
sage: g.eigenvalues()
doesn't work. Did you remove eigenvalues and eigenvectors?
3. The command
sage: A = maxima("A: matrix ([1, 0, 0], [1, -1, 0], [1, 3, -2])")
sage: eigA = A.eigenvectors()
sage: V = VectorSpace(QQ,3)
sage: eigA
[[[ - 2, - 1,1],[1,1,1]],[0,0,1],[0,1,3],[1,1/2,5/6]]
sage: v1 = V(sage_eval(str(eigA[1]))); lambda1 = sage_eval(str(eigA[0][0][0]))
sage: v2 = V(sage_eval(str(eigA[2]))); lambda2 = sage_eval(str(eigA[0][0][1]))
sage: v3 = V(sage_eval(str(eigA[3]))); lambda3 = sage_eval(str(eigA[0][0][2]))
sage: M = MatrixSpace(QQ,3,3)
sage: AA = M([[1,0,0],[1, - 1,0],[1,3, - 2]])
sage: AA*v1 == lambda1*v1
True
sage: AA*v2 == lambda2*v2
True
sage: AA*v3 == lambda3*v3
True
works. However, it seems overly tricky to me. The previous version didn't
require such gymnastics to convert a "Maxima element" (even if it
is an integer) to a SAGE element. Is it okay to leave this as above?
4. The maxima output has changed:
sage: maxima.eval("f:bessel_y (v, w)")
'?%bessel_y(v,w)'
(it used to be 'bessel_y(v,w)'). Is this a consequence of the new
version of Maxima? Do you want that? The extra "?%" is confusing.
5. This seems to indicate a bug:
sage: MS = MatrixSpace(GF(7), 2)
sage: sage: gens = [MS([[1,0],[-1,1]]),MS([[1,1],[0,1]])]
sage: sage: G = MatrixGroup(gens)
sage: G.conjugacy_class_representatives()
[
[1 0]
[0 1],
[6 0]
[0 6]
]
It worked correctly in the previous version of SAGE.
6. The module Numeric does not seem to exist:
sage: import Numeric
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<type 'exceptions.ImportError'> Traceback (most recent call last)
/home/wdj/sagefiles/sage-1.5.alpha12/devel/doc-1.5.alpha12/tut/<ipython
console> in <module>()
<type 'exceptions.ImportError'>: No module named Numeric
Are you leaving Numeric out? I vaguely remember a discussion about
numeric/numpy/scipy but I've forgotten what the decision was. I think
it used to be a standard package.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 12/11/06, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/11/06, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > If anybody wants to help with SAGE-1.5, this wiki page has the current
> > status:
> >
> > http://sage.math.washington.edu:9001/1.5
> >
> > In particular help on tut.tex, const.tex would be appreciated, along with
>
> I'll have some time to work on tut and const today.
>
>
> > maybe somebody doing the NTL polynomial factorization thing mentioned
> > below.
> >
> > Summary:
> >
> > (1) A few modular symbols doctests fail. I'm not too worried about this.
> > Likewise regarding linear_codes.py, which Nick is working on.
> >
> > (2) Polynomial factorization in PARI over finite fields CRASHES a *lot*.
> > We need to switch to using NTL for this. Does anybody want to help
> > (e.g.,
> > Martin)?
> >
> > (3) Fix broken doctests in tut.tex and const.tex.
> >
> > (4) Fine tune ref.tex
> >
> > (5) Lots of building and testing on many platforms.
> >
> > (6) Numpy issues (!) -- we need to run their build, then test to see if
> > it *really* worked, and if not, force it to build again but without
> > using any optimized BLAS. It should do all that itself, but it does
> > not.
> > E.g., on zeno.math.washington.edu, the numpy build is screwie.
> >
> > I'm going to sleep now, so won't actively be working on any of
> > this for several hours...
> >
> > -- William
> >
> > > >
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
