On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 01:33:59AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation! Everything seems to work fine now.
> I gave a positive review on trac for the added features, perhaps
> someone else could do a technical review of the patch.
I'll try to handle the technical review (thou
Hi Simon,
Thanks for the explanation! Everything seems to work fine now.
I gave a positive review on trac for the added features, perhaps
someone else could do a technical review of the patch.
Best,
Anne
On 3/26/11 11:11 PM, Simon King wrote:
Hi Anne,
On 27 Mrz., 00:39, Anne Schilling wrote
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 11:35:18PM -0700, Simon King wrote:
> On 27 Mrz., 08:11, Simon King wrote:
> > I guess, what I should do is to test at the beginning of the
> > groebner_basis method whether we have a field, and give a clear error
> > message. Also I should mention that restriction in the d
On 27 Mrz., 08:11, Simon King wrote:
> I guess, what I should do is to test at the beginning of the
> groebner_basis method whether we have a field, and give a clear error
> message. Also I should mention that restriction in the doc string of
> the groebner_basis method.
Udate done. But no rebas
Hi Anne,
On 27 Mrz., 00:39, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> I am not sure this is the smallest example, but I get some error messages when
> playing with the quotients:
>
> sage: n=3
> sage: F = FreeAlgebra(ZZ,n,'x',implementation='letterplace')
That's the other restriction (besides homege
Hi Simon,
I am not sure this is the smallest example, but I get some error messages when
playing with the quotients:
sage: n=3
sage: F = FreeAlgebra(ZZ,n,'x',implementation='letterplace')
sage: x = F.gens()
sage: rel = [x[(i+1)%n]*x[i]*x[i]-x[i]*x[(i+1)%n]*x[i] for i in range(n)]
sage: rel += [
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 09:23:04AM -0700, Simon King wrote:
> I'll probably be not able to rebase it until Monday, but if you like,
> you can rebase it.
Ok. I'll try to do that tonight. Otherwise tomorrow evening.
> Concerning the methods discussed here: For the current version of the
> patch, I
Hi Anne, hi Nicolas,
On 26 Mrz., 15:30, Anne Schilling wrote:
> >> Could you then rebase trac7797 so that it is easier to use it in the
> >> sage-combinat queue? I added it there, but it is currently disabled.
>
> > Ok, as soon as I get Simon's green light.
>
> Sounds good! Simon, can we rebased
On 3/26/11 7:06 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 06:11:44AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
I just review #10961, but unfortunately could not give it a positive review
due to a typo in the doc test (the tests do not pass). Once that is fixed
I am happy to give a positive review.
Hi Simon,
One advantage of having a similar set up to AlgebrasWithBasis would be the
following
commands which are often quite useful:
sage: G = AlgebrasWithBasis(ZZ).example()
sage: G
An example of an algebra with basis: the free algebra on the generators
('a', 'b', 'c') over Integer
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 06:11:44AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> I just review #10961, but unfortunately could not give it a positive review
> due to a typo in the doc test (the tests do not pass). Once that is fixed
> I am happy to give a positive review.
Done. Thanks
> Could you then rebase tr
Hi Nicolas and Simon,
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
Nicolas, I wanted to add the patch trac7797-full_letterplace_wrapper.patch
to the sage-combinat queue to test it, but it does not commute with your patch
trac_10961-lie_bracket_in_rings-nt.patch. Would it be p
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 06:00:50AM -0700, Simon King wrote:
> Thank you! That was what I was looking for.
Indeed, that's one of the first tutorial we run during our
Sage-Combinat days :-)
We really need to get our collection of tutorials in Sage. There are
just some Sphinx technicalities that we
Hi Nicolas,
On 26 Mrz., 11:59, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> ...
> Very short answer for the moment: I should have pointed you to the
> upcoming tutorial:
>
> http://combinat.sagemath.org/doc/reference/demos/tutorial-using-free-...
Thank you! That was what I was looking for.
Some comments: I wou
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 03:00:10AM -0700, Simon King wrote:
> On 26 Mrz., 08:03, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> wrote:
> > What's the category for F? It would be great if it was in
> > AlgebrasWithBasis, and in particular if CombinatorialFreeModule and
> > FreeAlgebra would be consistent with each other (i
Hi Nicolas,
On 26 Mrz., 11:00, Simon King wrote:
> Sorry, I first saw your post on sage-algebra and answered there,
> although it might have been better to do it on combinat-devel. Anyway,
> I am very unhappy with the documentation of the "...WithBasis" stuff.
> After several attempts, I still do
Hi Nicolas,
On 26 Mrz., 08:03, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> What's the category for F? It would be great if it was in
> AlgebrasWithBasis, and in particular if CombinatorialFreeModule and
> FreeAlgebra would be consistent with each other (in particular for the
> accessors on elements). The role o
Hi Simon,
Great! This works now. I'll play around with your patch and will report later.
Cheers,
Anne
On 3/25/11 11:05 AM, Simon King wrote:
Hi!
I got it!
On 25 Mrz., 18:59, Simon King wrote:
$ ls sage/algebras/letterplace/
free_algebra_element_letterplace.pxd free_algebra_letterplace.py
Hi Simon,
This is beautiful! Thanks for your (and Singular)'s hard work on this!
What's the category for F? It would be great if it was in
AlgebrasWithBasis, and in particular if CombinatorialFreeModule and
FreeAlgebra would be consistent with each other (in particular for the
accessors o
Hi Anne, Simon,
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Nicolas, I wanted to add the patch trac7797-full_letterplace_wrapper.patch
> to the sage-combinat queue to test it, but it does not commute with your patch
> trac_10961-lie_bracket_in_rings-nt.patch. Would it
Hi!
I got it!
On 25 Mrz., 18:59, Simon King wrote:
> $ ls sage/algebras/letterplace/
> free_algebra_element_letterplace.pxd free_algebra_letterplace.pyx
> free_algebra_element_letterplace.pyx letterplace_ideal.pyx
> free_algebra_letterplace.pxd
>
> So, everything is put in place by the patch (
Hi again,
what I just did was:
Remove the build directories for letterplace:
$ rm -r build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.6/sage/algebras/letterplace/
$ rm -r build/sage/algebras/letterplace/
$ rm -r build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.6/sage/algebras/letterplace/
$ rm -r sage/algebras/letterplace/
Apply the patch:
$
Hi Anne,
Anne Schilling schrieb:
> python `which cython` --cplus --embed-positions --directive
> cdivision=True,autotestdict=False
> -I/Applications/sage-4.6.2/devel/sage-combinat -o
> sage/algebras/letterplace/free_algebra_letterplace.cpp
> sage/algebras/letterplace/free_algebra_letterplace.py
Hi Simon,
When I apply your patch to sage-4.6.2 and then run sage -b, I get the following
error message.
Building sage/symbolic/ring.pyx because it depends on sage/rings/ring.pxd.
Building sage/ext/interpreters/wrapper_cdf.pyx because it depends on
sage/rings/ring.pxd.
Building sage/ext/interp
Hi Simon,
Thank you! I'll have a look.
Nicolas, I wanted to add the patch trac7797-full_letterplace_wrapper.patch
to the sage-combinat queue to test it, but it does not commute with your patch
trac_10961-lie_bracket_in_rings-nt.patch. Would it be possible to rebase it?
Also, would it be possibl
Hi Anne,
On 24 Mrz., 10:53, Anne Schilling wrote:
> ...
> Ok, this should not be a problem since in the application I have in mind
> the relations are homogeneous and hence only terms in homogeneous terms
> will cancel.
>
> > Therefore, in my to-be-submitted-as-soon-as-the-damned-documentation-
>
Hi Simon,
I just joined sage-combinat-devel, so, this time, I can answer
directly.
Great!
The trick is to interpret elements of a free algebra as elements of a
very large commutative ring (namely with infinitely many generators).
This is where the name "letterplace" comes from. Namely, each
Hi Anne,
I just joined sage-combinat-devel, so, this time, I can answer
directly.
On 24 Mrz., 09:39, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Looking at the link, it seems this is working with monomials in
> commutative variables. But this would still apply for monoids/
> algebras where the generators do not nec
28 matches
Mail list logo
