Hi David,
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Minh Nguyennguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Dr. David
Kirkbydavid.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
I forgot. Try:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/Solaris-fixes/mpfr/mpfr-2.4.1p0.spkg
it should make no
I'm not sure what the right plan for variables is, but if you're rewriting
polynomial printing, take a look at sage/rings/padics/padic_printing.pyx. I
think that having a printer object attached to a parent, allowing for a
different inheritance tree for the printing objects and more flexibility
Hi,
I'm trying to compile Sage 4.1 on a 64bit AMD computer (actually the
front node of a cluster) and I get a weird error.
The full log is here: http://carlo-hamalainen.net/sagetmp/install-2009-07-18.log
Here's the weird bit:
sage-spkg opencdk-0.6.6 21
You must set the SAGE_ROOT environment
Hi Carlo,
strange indeed. I looked at log you posted, several spkg's install
fine, e.g.:
libgpg_error-1.6.p1
Machine:
Linux snehurka 2.6.18 #6 SMP Mon Nov 27 17:53:06 CET 2006 x86_64 GNU/
Linux
Deleting directories from past builds of previous/current versions of
libgpg_error-1.6.p1
Extracting
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM, gswgeorgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
The error message O j: operation is not possible without
initialized secure memory is not a one from Sage, but from your
system, and triggered somehow by calling the ls command.
A Google search for the string O
Hi,
In new symbolics, the default symbolic variables are complex.
However, sometime it is useful/desirable to make the domain of
variables to be real.
Currently, there are no way to specify the domain of variables
in Sage although underlying Ginac allows it. For example: following
would to be
Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi David,
Hi Minh
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Minh Nguyennguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Dr. David
Kirkbydavid.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
I forgot. Try:
Hi Golam,
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Golam Mortuza
Hossaingmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
I could implement above rather easily by exposing underlying Ginac
feature. However, I am not sure how to submit patches for pynac/ginac
as its not under devel/sage.
The Pynac website is
Hi,
On Jun 25, 9:05 am, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:22:46 +0200
Stan Schymanski schym...@gmail.com wrote:
I have been asked to forward the below to the sage-devel list. Ticket
#6290 introduced a way to custom-define thelatexstyle of functions,
but it
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 06:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Jun 25, 9:05 am, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:22:46 +0200
Stan Schymanski schym...@gmail.com wrote:
I have been asked to forward the below to the
Hi!
On 18 Jul., 05:14, Alex Ghitza aghi...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I'd like the second example to look more like the first and it's
pretty easy to make that happen. However, this means:
{{{
sage: x
1.00*x
sage: y
1.00*y
sage: (x^2 - y).variables()
I think it has been a good idea to create such a new google groups for
Pynac, but at the moment it is just empty! :)
It would probably help focusing on some topics related to symbolics,
and be more suitable for communication of new stuff/features to the
community, without necessarily bothering
I'd be interested what you get if you build this program, which was
written by one of the gcc guys to try to get to the bottom of this issue
with mpfr not building.
On the Sun T5240 ('t2') donated by Sun to the Sage project, it dumps core:
kir...@t2:[~] $ ./a.out
n=0
n=1
Abort (core dumped)
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I'd be interested what you get if you build this program, which was
written by one of the gcc guys to try to get to the bottom of this issue
with mpfr not building.
On the Sun T5240 ('t2') donated by Sun to the Sage project, it dumps core:
kir...@t2:[~] $
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Nathann Cohennathann.co...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everybody !!!
I finally wrote the two versions of the LP solver for SAGE, the first
using COIN-OR and the second GLPK. It is a very early version of the
solver, with few if any control of errors (
On Jul 18, 5:09 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote:
I'd be interested what you get if you build this program, which was
written by one of the gcc guys to try to get to the bottom of this issue
with mpfr not building.
I get a warning. The program runs but not much output.
Jason Grout wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I'd be interested what you get if you build this program, which was
written by one of the gcc guys to try to get to the bottom of this issue
with mpfr not building.
On the Sun T5240 ('t2') donated by Sun to the Sage project, it dumps core:
MaxTheMouse wrote:
On Jul 18, 5:09 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote:
I'd be interested what you get if you build this program, which was
written by one of the gcc guys to try to get to the bottom of this issue
with mpfr not building.
I get a warning. The program
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Are you compiling this as 64-bit code? If so, then I would expect this.
Can you try as 32-bit code.
try
$ gcc -m32 that-code.c
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To
On Jul 18, 9:36 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Are you compiling this as 64-bit code? If so, then I would expect this.
Can you try as 32-bit code.
try
$ gcc -m32 that-code.c
Okay, that did it. As 32-bit code I get no warning and the output
MaxTheMouse wrote:
On Jul 18, 9:36 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Are you compiling this as 64-bit code? If so, then I would expect this.
Can you try as 32-bit code.
try
$ gcc -m32 that-code.c
Okay, that did it. As 32-bit code I get no
On my laptop with
OS: Windows 2000
CPU: Intel Pentium M 1500MHz
Compiler: GCC 3.4.2 (from an old-ish MinGW)
it compiles fine and produces the same output as on your Blade 2000.
Sebastian
On Jul 18, 4:09 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote:
I'd be interested what
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:23:29PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Martin
Albrechtm...@informatik.uni-bremen.de wrote:
Hi there,
is there any compelling technical reason why we are using all.py for module
level initialisation instead of the Python
Pat LeSmithe wrote:
On 2009-Jul-01 01:21:56 -0700, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com
wrote:
Is anyone else seeing the fonts injsmathin firefox 3.5 messed up? To
check this, go to
http://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/symbols/cmmi10.html.
This is now
Hi!
Here are two independent Sage 4.1 sessions which demonstrate that the
construction of NumberField's is context dependent:
sage: K.x = CyclotomicField(5)[]
sage: W.a = NumberField(x^2 + 1)
sage: W
Number Field in a with defining polynomial x^2 + 1 over
I'm not worried about your second example as such (p is an element of
a symbolic ring while q is a polynomial over the cyclotomic field).
But you first examlple is definitely a bug. You first create the
quadratic field Q(sqrt(-1)); then you create a quadratic extension of
the 5th cyclotomic
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Nicolas M.
Thierynicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
Hi!
Here are two independent Sage 4.1 sessions which demonstrate that the
construction of NumberField's is context dependent:
sage: K.x = CyclotomicField(5)[]
sage: W.a = NumberField(x^2
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Nicolas M.
Thierynicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 04:23:29PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Martin
Albrechtm...@informatik.uni-bremen.de wrote:
Hi there,
is there any compelling technical reason why
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Nicolas M.
Thierynicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
Hi William,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 04:37:34PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
On 7/13/09, Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
Dear William, dear Franco,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 8:39 PM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Tim Laheytim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks like the unladen-swallow Python branch
has been making good progress. They now can
pass their test suite of third party packages
(including
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:45 AM, Minh Nguyennguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
Concerning ticket #6399
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6399
does anyone know who reviewed that ticket?
You are the one who changed the review to positive review. Robert
Miller explains on the
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Marshall Hamptonhampto...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm probably in the minority on this, but I think tachyon being
totally broken in sage-4.1 is bad enough that a sage-4.1.0.1 should be
released as soon as possible with this fixed, not waiting for the
4.1.1 cycle to
On Jul 18, 2009, at 7:49 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Burcin Erocal wrote:
I attached a patch to the trac ticket that contains an initial
attempt
at the MMA notation:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6344
FYI, a few days ago Burcin uploaded a new patch on 6344 and asked for
Burcin Erocal wrote:
I attached a patch to the trac ticket that contains an initial attempt
at the MMA notation:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6344
FYI, a few days ago Burcin uploaded a new patch on 6344 and asked for
review. Here are the examples:
OLD:
sage: var('x,y')
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Simon Kingsimon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Hi!
On 18 Jul., 05:14, Alex Ghitza aghi...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I'd like the second example to look more like the first and it's
pretty easy to make that happen. However, this means:
{{{
sage: x
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Franco Saliolasali...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 8:39 PM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Tim Laheytim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks like the unladen-swallow Python branch
has been making good progress.
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 6:35 AM, David Joynerwdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:13 AM, David Joynerwdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Martin
Albrechtm...@informatik.uni-bremen.de wrote:
On Thursday 16 July 2009, David Joyner wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15,
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Jason Groutjason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
Burcin Erocal wrote:
I attached a patch to the trac ticket that contains an initial attempt
at the MMA notation:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6344
FYI, a few days ago Burcin uploaded a new patch
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:04 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
Please do not make the above change. It would be very inconsistent
with what happens for symbolic variables:
sage: var('x,y,z,w')
sage: f = 1.0*x^2 - 1.0*y
sage: f.variables()
(x, y)
I'm not sure symbolic variables
39 matches
Mail list logo
