On Dec 29, 2008, at 9:13 PM, root wrote:
I think there might be a bit of overconfidence in assuming that any
one of the top 10 Sage developers is going to reproduce even a
fraction of that complexity in the near term.
That's not what is being discussed. The question is about the
Hi,
I was recently looking at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3214
which pointed out a bug in taking the gcd of a bunch of rational numbers.
I'm not sure we should even be doing this. Here are some arguments:
1. this behaviour is not documented in gcd?? (it is
I have just compiled sage on fedora 10.
this is what i have got:
.
.
.
sage-3.2.1/.hg/store/data/sage/interfaces/sage0.py.i
sage-3.2.1/.hg/store/data/sage/interfaces/singular.py.i
sage-3.2.1/.hg/store/data/sage/interfaces/sympow.py.i
sage-3.2.1/.hg/store/data/sage/interfaces/tachyon.py.i
On Dec 30, 12:48 pm, Hassan hsn.zam...@gmail.com wrote:
I have just compiled sage on fedora 10.
Can you please tell us which source file you downloaded and what
commands have you entered prior to this errors?
thx, harald
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this
On Dec 30, 3:48 am, Hassan hsn.zam...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Hassan,
I have just compiled sage on fedora 10.
this is what i have got:
SNIP
sage-3.2.1/.hg/store/data/sage/interfaces/template.py.i
Finished extraction
There is no spkg-install script, no setup.py, and no configure script,
so
I agree that this functionality should be given a different name so we
can keep gcd for genuine gcds.
Alex, your definition of common denominator is not exactly the same as
the denominator of the gcd. I think a more useful function which
would apply to the field of fractions of any PID would be
On Dec 30, 3:02 pm, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 12:48 pm, Hassan hsn.zam...@gmail.com wrote:
I have just compiled sage on fedora 10.
Can you please tell us which source file you downloaded and what
commands have you entered prior to this errors?
thx,
my tar is 204.7 MB,
I will try 3.2.2 but not right new
On Dec 30, 3:03 pm, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:48 am, Hassan hsn.zam...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Hassan,
I have just compiled sage on fedora 10.
this is what i have got:
SNIP
The docstring for srange() says:
Return list of numbers \code{a, a+step, ..., a+k*step},
where \code{a+k*step b} and \code{a+(k+1)*step b}.
This is the best way to get an iterator over Sage integers as
opposed to Python int's. It also allows you to specify step sizes
to
The rpm packages gcc43-ob-c++ and gcc-obj-c++ are
not installed by default in opensuse 11.0.
After I installed them, sage 3.2.1 compiled successfully.
Now I can run sage 3.2.1.
Thanks for all the replies!
Shing
On Dec 29, 8:49 pm, Gabriel Dos Reis dosr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Dec 29,
On Dec 30, 5:16 am, Shing mat...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi Shing,
The rpm packages gcc43-ob-c++ and gcc-obj-c++ are
not installed by default in opensuse 11.0.
Ok, what do they provide? Given the fact that you build NTL which is C+
+ way earlier than matplotlib this is very strange indeed.
Writing a common lisp system in python would solve your problem and be
more feasible, in my opinion.
If you want to write a program to do 80-90 percent of freshman
calculus problems, copy the program
in Norvig's book which implements the derivative-divides method (and
is based on a program I
I do not know difference between gcc and gcc-obj-c++ packages.
Shing
On Dec 30, 1:20 pm, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 5:16 am, Shing mat...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi Shing,
The rpm packages gcc43-ob-c++ and gcc-obj-c++ are
not installed by default in opensuse 11.0.
Ok,
This would be fun to have - if I can get to Sage Days 15 perhaps it
would make a good project for me.
As clarification, the sort of celestial mechanics I do for research is
on the extreme pure-math side, so the workshop I am running doesn't
really intersect this project. But I am interested in
Hi William,
I do not see sympy at all as the future for symbolic integration. I
would instead imagine looking more broadly for a way to get symbolic
integration capabilities into Sage. This could include:
* writing something from scratch
* porting what is in GIAC
* porting what
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:32:06 -0800
William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I do not see sympy at all as the future for symbolic integration. I
would instead imagine looking more broadly for a way to get symbolic
integration capabilities into Sage. This could include:
* writing
On Dec 30, 2008, at 1:54 PM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
A longer term project (1-2 months), is to implement the transcendental
Risch algorithm from scratch. This can be done by going through the
pseudo code in Bronstein's book
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:34 AM, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
The docstring for srange() says: [snip]
srange's docstring is wrong and should be fixed. Please post a patch.
The function sxrange gives a proper python iterator. The
documentation for srange should contain a remark
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:44:48 -0800
William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I noticed Burcin said the following in IRC, which is related to the
above distinction:
12:58 burcin I thought this was the goal all along, I don't see
why we needed a new discussion about this
One reason we
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:44:48 -0800
William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
I noticed Burcin said the following in IRC, which is related to the
above distinction:
12:58 burcin I thought this was the goal all
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 11:13:53 -0800
William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:34 AM, John Cremona
john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
The docstring for srange() says: [snip]
srange's docstring is wrong and should be fixed. Please post a patch.
The function sxrange
Is there some confusion of release numbers here:
Release 190 sage-3.2.1.tar 204 MB 2008-12-19
Release 189 sage-3.2.2.tar 205 MB 2008-12-19
at http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/src ?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
Is there some confusion of release numbers here:
Release 190 sage-3.2.1.tar 204 MB 2008-12-19
Release 189 sage-3.2.2.tar 205 MB 2008-12-19
at http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/src ?
The
Despite Burcin's relevant observation, I'll open a ticket and post a
patch with the suggested docstring changes.
John
2008/12/30 Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org:
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 11:13:53 -0800
William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:34 AM, John Cremona
Could you please elaborate (in technical terms) what is wrong in
principle with our Risch algorithm implementation, apart that it needs
fixing for integrals that it cannot yet do? Or is the approach we took
with sympy not the right one to get the symbolic integration done.
If Sage developers are
On Dec 30, 2008, at 1:21 PM, root wrote:
Ondrej,
As an objective measure of sympy, what results do you get for the
Schaums test suite:
http://axiom-developer.org/axiom-website/CATS
Tim,
I'm planning on supporting SymPy at some point with my version of
the test suite, but differences
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Tim Lahey tim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2008, at 1:21 PM, root wrote:
Ondrej,
As an objective measure of sympy, what results do you get for the
Schaums test suite:
http://axiom-developer.org/axiom-website/CATS
Tim,
I'm planning on supporting
On Dec 30, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Thanks for doing it. I'll try to fix any remaining problems with the
conversion if there are some.
No problem. Sympy is the main reason I've decided to release the
test suite as BSD. That way, once it's complete you'll be able to
include it
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Tim Lahey tim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Thanks for doing it. I'll try to fix any remaining problems with the
conversion if there are some.
No problem. Sympy is the main reason I've decided to release the
I've got a build failure in Atlas on Debian. Any ideas?
--
p...@billpage:~/sage-3.2.2$ cat /etc/issue
Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 \n \l
p...@billpage:~/sage-3.2.2$ cat /etc/debian_version
4.0
p...@billpage:~/sage-3.2.2$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-21)
--
On Dec 30, 1:58 pm, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
Hi Bill,
I've got a build failure in Atlas on Debian. Any ideas?
---
p...@billpage:~/sage-3.2.2$ cat /etc/issue
Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 \n \l
p...@billpage:~/sage-3.2.2$ cat /etc/debian_version
4.0
Hi everyone,
I have a small issue that I would like an official opinion on. Should
proper names in functions be lower-case? For example, if you are
writing a function to do Newton's method, should it be called
newtons_method or Newtons_method? I have been capitalizing names but
it seems I am
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:18 PM, mhampton hampto...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have a small issue that I would like an official opinion on. Should
proper names in functions be lower-case? For example, if you are
writing a function to do Newton's method, should it be called
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:04 PM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:58 pm, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
Hi Bill,
I've got a build failure in Atlas on Debian. Any ideas?
---
p...@billpage:~/sage-3.2.2$ cat /etc/issue
Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 \n \l
Could you please elaborate (in technical terms) what is wrong in
principle with our Risch algorithm implementation, apart that it needs
fixing for integrals that it cannot yet do? Or is the approach we took
with sympy not the right one to get the symbolic integration done.
If Sage developers are
Michael,
This tuning stuff seems to take an unusually long time... :-(
I am running this on a virtual machine with 2 Gb. memory:
p...@billpage:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 29
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
Michael,
This tuning stuff seems to take an unusually long time... :-(
That's because the hardware is so new that there is no support in
ATLAS for it. Expect it to take at least 4 hours, if it works at all.
I am
Hi,
If you're into algebraic geometry and strongly interested in coming to
the Sage Days at MSRI March 9 - 12 (see
http://wiki.sagemath.org/days14), then please send me an email at
wst...@gmail.com. I don't exactly have funding yet, but if I had a
group of people needing funding, I may be able
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:13 PM, William Stein wrote:
You might be able to use a binary of sage just fine in the meantime.
There's one in /usr/local/sage/dist/ on sage.math, which might work.
It's build for Ubuntu, but might work on that debian 64-bit machine
you have.
-- william
I
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:13 PM, William Stein wrote:
You might be able to use a binary of sage just fine in the meantime.
There's one in /usr/local/sage/dist/ on sage.math, which might work.
It's build for Ubuntu,
On Dec 30, 3:13 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
Michael,
This tuning stuff seems to take an unusually long time... :-(
That's because the hardware is so new that there is no support in
ATLAS for it.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:37 PM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:13 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org
wrote:
Michael,
This tuning stuff seems to take an unusually long time... :-(
On Dec 30, 3:41 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:37 PM, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
SNIP
I have had no problem at all building ATLAS on the new sage.math
repeatedly. And it doesn't take at least four hours.
Well, technically it does.
I
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:37 PM, mabshoff wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:13 pm, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Bill Page wrote:
Michael,
This tuning stuff seems to take an unusually long time... :-(
That's because the hardware is so new that there is no support
in ATLAS
On Dec 30, 3:56 pm, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:37 PM, mabshoff wrote:
SNIP
Well, blame VMWare then. The tuning process died - that is usually
not a software problem.
I don't mind blaming VMWare, but that doesn't solve my problem. :-)
On Dec 30, 2008, at 7:13 PM, mabshoff wrote:
g95 is a gfortran fork which used to be better in the gcc 4.0/4.1
timeframe, but has seriously fallen behind gfortran these days IMHO.
But I am not a Fortran compiler expert, so some people might disagree.
I would strongly vote for getting rid
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Tim Lahey tim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2008, at 7:13 PM, mabshoff wrote:
g95 is a gfortran fork which used to be better in the gcc 4.0/4.1
timeframe, but has seriously fallen behind gfortran these days IMHO.
But I am not a Fortran compiler
On Dec 30, 4:19 pm, Tim Lahey tim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2008, at 7:13 PM, mabshoff wrote:
Hi,
g95 is a gfortran fork which used to be better in the gcc 4.0/4.1
timeframe, but has seriously fallen behind gfortran these days IMHO.
But I am not a Fortran compiler expert, so
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:36 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Bill Page wrote:
...
Then I tried
p...@billpage:~$ wget
http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/linux/64bit/sage-3.2.1-Debian_x86_64-opteron-x86_64-Linux.tar.gz
billpage:~# cd
On Dec 30, 5:06 pm, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote:
SNIP
Is there any way to kill the WARNING ?
rm local/lib/sage-flags.txt
Regards,
Bill Page.
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
50 matches
Mail list logo
