Hi Florent,
Is it possible that one of your patches does not apply cleanly?
Cheers,
Anne
...
applying graded_algebra_with_basis_example-nb.patch
applying functorial_constructions-nt.patch
patching file sage/categories/sets_cat.py
Hunk #3 succeeded at 429 with fuzz 2 (offset 14 lines).
In trac #8442 I posted a patch that makes a new tutorial called Lie
Methods and Related Combinatorics in Sage.
It covers techniques for working with Lie groups, particularly
representations, but also Weyl groups (Bruhat order, etc), Iwahori
Hecke algebras and Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials. A
On Mar 3, 2010, at 10:50 AM, kstueve wrote:
I've been working more on TOS's Li based pi(x) approximation code.
I've been trying to optimize it in c. It seems that I need someone
more knowledgeable than myself in c to point out some simple mistake I
am making that is preventing the code from
There are the Wester tests, which we ship and test (the ones we can do
at least)
http://hg.sagemath.org/sage-main/file/8c4f10086e20/sage/calculus/wester.py
I believe there is also some randomized testing that is done in the
category code that takes random elements and verifies they have the
I believe the speed of c is worthwhile here. And I am not skilled in
Cython.
On Mar 4, 12:12 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
On Mar 3, 2010, at 10:50 AM, kstueve wrote:
I've been working more on TOS's Li based pi(x) approximation code.
I've been trying to optimize
On Mar 3, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
Right now it takes over 1.5 seconds every time.
wst...@sage:~$ time sage -c print factor(2010)
2 * 3 * 5 * 67
real0m1.535s
user
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:26 AM, kstueve wrote:
I believe the speed of c is worthwhile here.
The point of Cython is that it has the same speed as C, but is much
easier to use (especially from Python).
And I am not skilled in Cython.
If you already know Python, and especially if you have a
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:24 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
I believe there is also some randomized testing that is done in the
category code that takes random elements and verifies they have the
correct properties (e.g. commutativity, associativity, etc.) that has
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
a feel for something, or to factor (or even multiply) several digit
numbers. It also makes it prohibitive to be
On 4 March 2010 09:46, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
a feel for something, or to factor (or
Hi Minh,
This release incorporates many combinatorics tickets positively
reviewed during and/or before Sage Days 20.
* The following tests failed on sage.math:
sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/categories/finite_semigroups.py # 2
doctests failed
sage -t -long
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
As I've mentioned before, internal consistency checks
can be better than comparing against commercial programs, so that way
anyone can run and verify them, and they often illustrate interesting
math (e.g. verification of deep, abstract theorems for specific examples).
Jason Grout wrote:
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
a feel for something, or to factor (or even multiply) several digit
numbers. It also makes
Hi David,
Although it is true that not everyone can run tests against commercial
software, I would have thought a significant proportion of Sage users
could. There is already an interface to Mathematica. Many Sage users and
developers work in universities, which often have
On Mar 4, 2010, at 2:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
As I've mentioned before, internal consistency checks can be better
than comparing against commercial programs, so that way anyone can
run and verify them, and they often illustrate interesting math
(e.g.
On Mar 4, 12:27 am, Vincent D 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote:
I just opened a SAGE wiki and a discussion list in french ...
Hi, www.sagemath.fr is just the /fr subfolder on the regular sagemath
website. I just wanted to contact you or somebody else to send me some
french html snippets that i
On 03/04/2010 03:52 AM, John Cremona wrote:
On 4 March 2010 09:46, Jason Groutjason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to
On 03/04/2010 04:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Anyway, it seems my view is a minority one here.
I don't think that's necessarily the case (I agree with you that
randomized testing is a good thing). However, I also agree with others
that writing doctests is more important for those that
On 03/04/2010 01:52 AM, John Cremona wrote:
Could that be solved by doing that startup as soon as the person logs
in? Or as soon as they open the worksheet (before they do the first
evaluate)?
We already do the latter (though not for doc worksheets). From
sagenb.notebook.twist, around line
If this is a call for a vote ;-), let me tell that I completely agree with the
point of view that in an ideal world, tests should be written *before* the
code and by a *different* person (extreme/peer programming).
In an ideal world test would be extracted from theorems of theoretical
papers.
On 3 March 2010 18:05, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
This release incorporates many combinatorics tickets positively
reviewed during and/or before Sage Days 20.
Source tarball:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-4.3.4.alpha0/sage-4.3.4.alpha0.tar
I had
On 03/04/2010 05:01 AM, Pat LeSmithe wrote:
Is memory use a problem, particularly on busy servers?
It definitely could be an issue on my campus server. I have 3GB in a
virtual machine right now (I'm writing an internal school grant for more
memory soon). Fortunately (?!), I haven't been
Jason Grout wrote:
On 03/04/2010 04:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Anyway, it seems my view is a minority one here.
I don't think that's necessarily the case (I agree with you that
randomized testing is a good thing). However, I also agree with others
that writing doctests is more
The other day, I wrote a small worksheet illustrating how to use a
PPPACK fortran routine to calculate splines in Sage [1]. PPPACK is a
venerable (in a good sense!) library for spline computation that is
decades old. I was very, very surprised today to see that a google
search for PPPACK
I only had those 2 failures (the finite_semigroups ones) on a machine
running 64-bit Ubuntu 9.10.
-Marshall
On Mar 4, 2:54 am, Florent Hivert florent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr
wrote:
Hi Minh,
This release incorporates many combinatorics tickets positively
reviewed during and/or before
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:35 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
[...]
I think we can have the names there without importing all the code
behind everything. With tab completion, a huge global namespace isn't
that bad.
How would this be possible, technically? I mean, is there a
Hello everybody
Because of a recent patch #8404 which should soon enable Sage to test
whether a graph G contains H as a minor, I was asked to provide with these
patches an explanation of how they are built. Well, as the same technique is
used over and over, it was not too hard to explain
On Mar 4, 1:28 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
I wonder how highly sagenb.org published worksheets are rated by google
now. Do other people find that sagenb.org worksheets get good google karma?
it's probably just that pppack as a word is only seldom used and
google gives
2010/3/4 Simon King simon.k...@nuigalway.ie:
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:35 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
[...]
I think we can have the names there without importing all the code
behind everything. With tab completion, a huge global namespace isn't
that bad.
How would this
And trying again to build Sage 4.3.3, MPIR seems to build fine. Sorry
or the false alarm. Thank you very much for your help!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Hi there,
Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a flame nor
to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a sage debian package.
However, during sage days 20 as well as during my course at the university of
Rouen, I've got at least a dozen reports of
Hi Nathann,
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
The result is this pdf file, which I
hope will be helpful to those who will be brave enough to review the
corresponding patches :-)
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
Florent Hivert florent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr wrote:
Hi there,
Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a
flame nor to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a
sage debian package.
However, during sage days 20 as
Hello !
I strongly encourage you to include that documentation in the graph
theory module of Sage. That is, if it's not in there already. Things
can and will get buried in the huge mailing list archive of
sage-devel.
Actually, I wouldn't know where to write them. Some of it already
appears
Hi Nathann,
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 4:18 AM, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
Actually, I wouldn't know where to write them. Some of it already
appears along the code as comments, but I wouldn't know where to write
all this. Were you thinking about copying it inside the
On a 32-bit ubuntu linux machine: build fine, the same 4 test
failures as on sage.math.
John
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
IBM HS22 E5540 4C 2.53GHZ 4GB BLADE
Hardware
CPU Name:Intel Xeon E5540
CPU Characteristics: Intel Turbo Boost Technology up to 2.80 GHz
CPU MHz: 2533
FPU: Integrated
CPU(s) enabled: 8 cores, 2 chips, 4 cores/chip, 2 threads/core
On 2010-Mar-03 21:01:54 +0100, Martin Rubey martin.ru...@math.uni-hannover.de
wrote:
William Stein wst...@gmail.com writes:
It's interesting that in all these threads nobody has mentioned sage
-startuptime. That's the command that reports on what modules are
here goes:
Interesting but no
about test suites - random or not so maybe slightly offtopic but
didn't wanted to open new topic for something so close - I just
wonder, had anyone tested Sage against http://eqworld.ipmnet.ru/ exact
solution database? It's basic database of exact solutions for
integrals, ODEs and much more - but
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Peter Jeremy peterjer...@acm.org wrote:
About the only way I can see to improve startup speed would be to
implement some form of lazy loading - during startup, Sage just loads
a set of stub functions (from a very small number of physical files).
When those
On Mar 4, 4:01 am, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
.
BTW, playing around I found this bug in Mathematica, by picking some extreme
cases.
In[3]:= Sin[2^900.23]
Out[3]= 0.938865 // This agrees with Sage.
In[4]:= Sin[2^5000.0]
Out[4]= 0.
It seems that for any
Hello, everyone !
While working on graph-theory related patchs, I have to test if some
optional tests pass. I tried to test the main branch of sage 4.3.3
without applying any new patch, but some tests fail ! Here is the
output. I thought that sage was 100% doctests... Is my main branch
broken ? Or
Hi Robert!
On 4 Mrz., 19:21, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
[...]
See, for example, lazy import athttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7502
Thank you very much, that was almost what I was hoping for.
What I don't like in that solution:
If you lazily import, say, QQ,
I am forwarding this from sage-support because it seems like it might
be a serious problem.
-Marshall
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yann yannlaiglecha...@gmail.com
Date: Mar 4, 5:49 pm
Subject: Why does my little program bring my department's server to
its knees?
To:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 4:14 PM, Simon King wrote:
Hi Robert!
On 4 Mrz., 19:21, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
[...]
See, for example, lazy import athttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7502
Thank you very much, that was almost what I was hoping for.
What I don't like
Hi Marshall!
You are right, this better belongs to sage-devel.
What I find interesting: The memory is not constantly leaking, there
are jumps.
sage: R.x=QQ[]
sage: M=get_memory_usage()
sage: for n in range(5):
: if get_memory_usage()M:
: M = get_memory_usage()
:
On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
Florent Hivertflorent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr wrote:
Hi there,
Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a
flame nor to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a
sage debian
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
Florent Hivertflorent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr wrote:
Hi there,
Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:14 PM, ablondin
alexandre.blondin.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello, everyone !
While working on graph-theory related patchs, I have to test if some
optional tests pass. I tried to test the main branch of sage 4.3.3
without applying any new patch, but some tests fail ! Here
actually, some of these optional things here only need an LP solver
(not a MILP solver), and Sage does have an LP solver, via
a standard package CVXOPT.
It would be nice to get rid of these dependencies on optional
packages.
Dima
On Mar 5, 8:14 am, ablondin alexandre.blondin.ma...@gmail.com
I've asked someone who is an active Debian developer about the removal
thing, how it is done...
Dmitrii
On Mar 5, 11:05 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com
wrote:
On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On
Cayley tables for groups aren't working properly (http://
trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7340), so I've taken this as an
excuse to write some new code for a more general object I've been
calling an operation table. (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/
ticket/7555) Besides groups, it could be
52 matches
Mail list logo
