Hi all,
I am trying to build Sage 4.4.1 from sourece, using gcc 4.4.1 on SUSE 11.2.
So far I have had two failures. I can work around the first, but have no clue
about the second.
Best, Paul
1. Problem with libreadline
Symptom:
[...]/local/lib/libreadline.so.6: undefined symbol: PC
Workaround:
T
On 16 Mai, 06:43, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 5/15/10 11:32 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> >> Surely this is not the first time this problem has been run into among
> >> this crowd. How is this typically dealt with when compiling a C file?
> >> Should I make a new include directory in module_list.p
On May 15, 2010, at 9:43 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 5/15/10 11:32 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
Surely this is not the first time this problem has been run into
among
this crowd. How is this typically dealt with when compiling a C
file?
Should I make a new include directory in module_list.py
On 5/15/10 11:32 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
Surely this is not the first time this problem has been run into among
this crowd. How is this typically dealt with when compiling a C file?
Should I make a new include directory in module_list.py (where the
appropriate .pyx files are compiled with t
On May 15, 2010, at 8:10 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi William,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:37 AM, William Stein
wrote:
Here's a link to the sandboxed version of the Sage website:
http://www.sagemath.org/sandbox/
It takes into account (most of) the issues you raised. I have not yet
made this v
On 16 Mai, 05:03, Jason Grout wrote:
> In fixing #8756, I've upgraded the graph planarity code to the most
> recent rewrite of John Boyer's planarity code. Unfortunately, the C
> code has several instances of:
>
> #include
>
> I just found out that OSX does not like this, where it should apparen
On May 15, 2010, at 7:41 PM, mhampton wrote:
I really don't like the plethora of discussion groups. I'd be happy
with sage-support and sage-everything-else. I find it very hard to
keep up with things I care about with the current setup. Many issues
do not cleanly fall into a particular catego
On May 15, 2010, at 19:41 , mhampton wrote:
I really don't like the plethora of discussion groups. I'd be happy
with sage-support and sage-everything-else. I find it very hard to
keep up with things I care about with the current setup. Many issues
do not cleanly fall into a particular categ
On May 15, 2010, at 20:03 , Jason Grout wrote:
In fixing #8756, I've upgraded the graph planarity code to the most
recent rewrite of John Boyer's planarity code. Unfortunately, the C
code has several instances of:
#include
I just found out that OSX does not like this, where it should
Hi William,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:37 AM, William Stein wrote:
Here's a link to the sandboxed version of the Sage website:
http://www.sagemath.org/sandbox/
It takes into account (most of) the issues you raised. I have not yet
made this version the live version of the Sage website. I have mo
In fixing #8756, I've upgraded the graph planarity code to the most
recent rewrite of John Boyer's planarity code. Unfortunately, the C
code has several instances of:
#include
I just found out that OSX does not like this, where it should apparently
either be
#include
(or maybe there's n
I really don't like the plethora of discussion groups. I'd be happy
with sage-support and sage-everything-else. I find it very hard to
keep up with things I care about with the current setup. Many issues
do not cleanly fall into a particular category.
-Marshall
On May 15, 3:10 pm, Simon King
On 16 May, 02:41, Roman Pearce wrote:
> On May 15, 6:21 pm, Bill Hart wrote:
>
> > I have the right number of terms, but not quite the right coefficient,
> > as of yet. This is a good test to help me dig out the bug. :-)
>
> Do you have a division routine? I divided f^100 by f to check the
> r
OK, it's working now. I was adding a coefficient where I should have
been setting it.
Times didn't really change though.
Bill.
On 16 May, 02:21, Bill Hart wrote:
> I have the right number of terms, but not quite the right coefficient,
> as of yet. This is a good test to help me dig out the bug.
On May 15, 6:21 pm, Bill Hart wrote:
> I have the right number of terms, but not quite the right coefficient,
> as of yet. This is a good test to help me dig out the bug. :-)
Do you have a division routine? I divided f^100 by f to check the
result. This is one way I test sdmp. You can also plu
I have the right number of terms, but not quite the right coefficient,
as of yet. This is a good test to help me dig out the bug. :-)
Thanks.
By the way, is your computation running on more than one core?
Bill.
On 16 May, 02:12, Roman Pearce wrote:
> I get that f^100 is a polynomial with 37219
I get that f^100 is a polynomial with 3721951 terms. The largest
coefficient belongs to x^44*y^181*z^131 and is
540685566063956356849231312581525435336487979299724512007837438591842230283354998840425635151449237483722428755963200
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups
As a check for my implementation, how many bits does the largest
coefficient have?
Bill.
On 16 May, 01:28, Roman Pearce wrote:
> Maple 14 on iMac Core i5 2.66 GHz 8GB (64-bit):
>
> f := x*y^3*z^2 + x^2*y^2*z + x*y^3*z + x*y^2*z^2 + y^3*z^2 + y^3*z +
> 2*y^2*z^2 + 2*x*y*z + y^2*z + y*z^2 + y^2 +
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On May 15, 2010, at 4:20 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:21 AM, William Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> It's about time http://sagemath.org got totally reworked for improved
>>> usability and simplici
Hmm, actually, on my machine Magma is much slower, and that is the
latest Magma. Though perhaps we don't have the right Magma for our
machine or something.
Bill.
On 16 May, 01:22, Bill Hart wrote:
> The times I get with the new code are 28s to K = 70 and 135s to K =
> 100. This is on an Opteron
Maple 14 on iMac Core i5 2.66 GHz 8GB (64-bit):
f := x*y^3*z^2 + x^2*y^2*z + x*y^3*z + x*y^2*z^2 + y^3*z^2 + y^3*z +
2*y^2*z^2 + 2*x*y*z + y^2*z + y*z^2 + y^2 + 2*y*z + z;
curr := 1:
TIMER := time[real]():
for i from 1 to 100 do
curr := expand(curr*f):
lprint(i=time[real]()-TIMER):
end do:
K=
The times I get with the new code are 28s to K = 70 and 135s to K =
100. This is on an Opteron K102 though, which probably does the
coefficient arithmetic a little faster than the core2. In fact much of
the time is probably coefficient arithmetic in this problem I would
guess. The coefficients must
On May 15, 2010, at 4:20 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi folks,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:21 AM, William Stein
wrote:
Hi,
It's about time http://sagemath.org got totally reworked for improved
usability and simplicity.I think a good way to start would be a
thread in which everybody who has an
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:21 AM, William Stein wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> It's about time http://sagemath.org got totally reworked for improved
>> usability and simplicity. I think a good way to start would be a
>> thread in which ev
Hi folks,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:21 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's about time http://sagemath.org got totally reworked for improved
> usability and simplicity.I think a good way to start would be a
> thread in which everybody who has any thoughts about "stuff being hard
> to find
Hi Simon,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Simon King wrote:
> I suggest (but not volunteer, I am not good at creating web pages) to
> add one page that lists *all* sage discussion groups that are devoted
> to special topics
I have updated the list of discussion groups. You should be able to
Given that we have been able to turn on registration only very late, the
EuroScipy conference committee is extending the deadline for abstract
submission for the 2010 EuroScipy conference.
On Thursday May 20th, at midnight Samoa time, we will turn off the
abstract submission on the conference site
Hi William,
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 7:47 AM, William Stein wrote:
> It was there, then it suddenly disappeared. Editing the sagemath.org
> website is confusion because there are multiple redundant directories,
> etc.
I'm updating the Sage website in response to any usability problems
reporte
On May 15, 2010, at 2:40 PM, John Cremona wrote:
On 15 May 2010 22:09, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
On May 15, 2010, at 8:54 AM, Simon King wrote:
Hi John!
On 15 Mai, 17:34, John Cremona wrote:
...
There's a more general issue here, perhaps. In your R = Z[[x]],
you
ask for the inverse of x
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:35 PM, John Cremona wrote:
> On 15 May 2010 21:36, William Stein wrote:
>> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Simon King wrote:
>>> On 15 Mai, 22:18, William Stein wrote:
There is such a list:
http://sagemath.org/development.html
It only took
On 15 May 2010 22:09, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On May 15, 2010, at 8:54 AM, Simon King wrote:
>
>> Hi John!
>>
>> On 15 Mai, 17:34, John Cremona wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> There's a more general issue here, perhaps. In your R = Z[[x]], you
>>> ask for the inverse of x, which is not invertible as an
On May 15, 9:03 pm, William Stein wrote:
> 1. On what hardware?
This was on 64 bit GNU/Linux (Fedora release 12) running on a dual
processor machine with two Intel Core 2 CPUs (each 2.4GHz, 4Gb
cache). I have included the contents of /proc/cpuinfo at the bottom
of this reply.
> 2. Can you po
On 15 May 2010 21:36, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Simon King wrote:
>> On 15 Mai, 22:18, William Stein wrote:
>>> There is such a list:
>>>
>>> http://sagemath.org/development.html
>>>
>>> It only took me 5 minutes of confusion and clicking on random links
>>> ath
On May 14, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Simon King wrote:
Hi Robert!
On 14 Mai, 18:34, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
1. Do you agree this is a bug?
The p-adic fields are of capped precision, not set precision, but
each
element remembers its own actual precision, so this is why the
coercion goes in that d
On May 15, 2010, at 8:54 AM, Simon King wrote:
Hi John!
On 15 Mai, 17:34, John Cremona wrote:
...
There's a more general issue here, perhaps. In your R = Z[[x]], you
ask for the inverse of x, which is not invertible as an element of R.
The conservative response is to return 1/x in the smalle
>
> Implement it and post a patch.
>
>
> --
> William Stein
> Professor of Mathematics
> University of Washingtonhttp://wstein.org
>
> --
> 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.c
On May 15, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
On 15 Mai, 22:10, Simon King wrote:
[...] I find
it relatively easy to ignore posts about topics that I am not
interested in. And occasionally it happens that I start to be
interested in a topic because of a thread.
+1
I think it makes s
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Simon King wrote:
> On 15 Mai, 22:18, William Stein wrote:
>> There is such a list:
>>
>> http://sagemath.org/development.html
>>
>> It only took me 5 minutes of confusion and clicking on random links
>> athttp://sagemath.orgto find that page.
>
> So, hard to
On 15 Mai, 22:18, William Stein wrote:
> There is such a list:
>
> http://sagemath.org/development.html
>
> It only took me 5 minutes of confusion and clicking on random links
> athttp://sagemath.orgto find that page.
So, hard to find, and incomplete (the list doesn't contain sage-
algebra).
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:21 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It's about time http://sagemath.org got totally reworked for improved
> usability and simplicity. I think a good way to start would be a
> thread in which everybody who has any thoughts about "stuff being hard
> to find at http://s
Hi,
It's about time http://sagemath.org got totally reworked for improved
usability and simplicity.I think a good way to start would be a
thread in which everybody who has any thoughts about "stuff being hard
to find at http://sagemath.org"; simply makes their personal pet peeve
list.So re
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Simon King wrote:
> Hi!
>
> John Cremona pointed out that my previous post would have fit better
> to sage-algebra. Is there any pointer to this and other thematic
> groups?
>
> On the start page of sage-devel are only links to sage-support, sage-
> edu and sage-ma
On 15 Mai, 22:10, Simon King wrote:
> [...] I find
> it relatively easy to ignore posts about topics that I am not
> interested in. And occasionally it happens that I start to be
> interested in a topic because of a thread.
+1
-Leif
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googleg
Hi!
John Cremona pointed out that my previous post would have fit better
to sage-algebra. Is there any pointer to this and other thematic
groups?
On the start page of sage-devel are only links to sage-support, sage-
edu and sage-marketing, but none to sage-algebra or sage-flame. And
http://www.sa
Hi,
It would be useful to have a page like this excellent page:
http://www.scipy.org/NumPy_for_Matlab_Users
William
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> On 05/15/10 08:03 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
>>
>> On 15 Mai, 19:52, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
>>>
>>> I think t
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Tom Coates wrote:
>
> Thank you (everyone!) for the many extremely helpful comments and
> links.
>
> Recall that I need to compute
>
> 1, f, f^2, ..., f^K
>
> for f in ZZ[x,y,z] and K known but large. (In fact I only need
> certain coefficients of the f^i, but th
On 15 Mai, 21:21, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> On 05/15/10 08:03 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
> >> I think a huge table of Mathematica/MATLAB/Sage/Magma equivalent functions
> >> would
> >> be useful.
>
> > Especially for people who want to use Sage and are already familiar
> > with Mathematica/MAT
Thank you (everyone!) for the many extremely helpful comments and
links.
Recall that I need to compute
1, f, f^2, ..., f^K
for f in ZZ[x,y,z] and K known but large. (In fact I only need
certain coefficients of the f^i, but this does not seem to help very
much.)
I have implemented the most naiv
Hi!
To conclude this thread: #8972 is ready for review (hint...), and
with the patch one has
sage: P. = ZZ[]
sage: R. = P[[]]
sage: 1/(t*x)
1/t*x^-1
sage: (1/x).parent() is FractionField(R)
True
sage: (x/x).parent() is Frac(R)
True
sage: Frac(R)
Laurent Series Ring in x over F
Hello,
What exactly does happen to self in docstrings or rather what exactly
*should* happen? Is it documented somewhere?
It seems to me that in instances of "self." (with the dot)
"self" (without the dot) is somehow smartly replaced using context.
That is great, but why not change standalone "se
On 05/15/10 08:03 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
On 15 Mai, 19:52, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
I think the biggest thing this proves is just how poorly that NIST table was put
together.
Ask them for founding a better one compiled by you... ;-)
Not quite sure I follow that.
I think a huge tab
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Jason B Hill
wrote:
>
> What sort of port is being considered here? I like the idea of porting to a
> jailbroken iPhone, but this seems a bit limited both in terms of performance
> and in terms of the percentage of the mobile market that uses jailbroken
> iPhones.
What sort of port is being considered here? I like the idea of porting to a
jailbroken iPhone, but this seems a bit limited both in terms of performance
and in terms of the percentage of the mobile market that uses jailbroken
iPhones.
It seems like a quick place to start would be to make a more mo
On 15 Mai, 19:52, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> I think the biggest thing this proves is just how poorly that NIST table was
> put
> together.
Ask them for founding a better one compiled by you... ;-)
> I think a huge table of Mathematica/MATLAB/Sage/Magma equivalent functions
> would
> be usefu
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Shinnohn Hiroshima wrote:
> I read your post on running Sage on the mobile OS X platform. Although the
> speed is impaired, would you mind detailing your steps in porting Sage to a
> jailbroken iPhone?
>
I have not ported Sage to the jailbroken iPhone *yet*.
On 05/15/10 05:22 PM, Harald Schilly wrote:
On May 14, 10:52 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
According to that table, Mathematica can't do the Lambert W-Function. As a
non-mathematician, that does not mean a lot to me, but reading.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LambertW-Function.html
That's inte
On May 14, 10:52 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
> According to that table, Mathematica can't do the Lambert W-Function. As a
> non-mathematician, that does not mean a lot to me, but reading.
>
> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LambertW-Function.html
That's interesting. My first thought was that our S
I did lots of experimenting. If I really go crazy with optimisation I
can get it down to about 1.93s. About another 0.05s is just taken up
figuring out which case we are in (e.g. everything fits in one limb,
or two limbs, or whatever). I could duplicate the code multiple times
for the different cas
Hi John!
On 15 Mai, 17:34, John Cremona wrote:
> ...
> There's a more general issue here, perhaps. In your R = Z[[x]], you
> ask for the inverse of x, which is not invertible as an element of R.
> The conservative response is to return 1/x in the smallest ring
> containing R in which x has in in
On 15 May 2010 15:40, Simon King wrote:
> Hi John!
>
> On 15 Mai, 16:03, John Cremona wrote:
>> The fraction field of Z[[x]] would have to contain Q, so cannot by the
>> Laurent Poly ring over Z. That's just Z[[x]] with x inverted, but you
>> would need to invert all the integer primes too!
>
>
Hi John!
On 15 Mai, 16:03, John Cremona wrote:
> The fraction field of Z[[x]] would have to contain Q, so cannot by the
> Laurent Poly ring over Z. That's just Z[[x]] with x inverted, but you
> would need to invert all the integer primes too!
That's why I wrote: "... so that R.fraction_field()
The fraction field of Z[[x]] would have to contain Q, so cannot by the
Laurent Poly ring over Z. That's just Z[[x]] with x inverted, but you
would need to invert all the integer primes too!
John
PS sage-algebra?
On 15 May 2010 13:37, Simon King wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I just noticed the following:
>
Hi!
I just noticed the following:
sage: P. = ZZ[]
sage: R = P.completion(x)
sage: R
Power Series Ring in x over Integer Ring
sage: (1/R(x)).parent()
Laurent Series Ring in x over Integer Ring
sage: F = FractionField(R)
sage: F
Fraction Field of Power Series Ring in x over Integer Ring
s
Hi There,
I got the following error using trac
Cheers,
Florent
Oops…
Trac detected an internal error:
ProgrammingError: could not write to hash-join temporary file: No space left on
device
There was an internal error in Trac. It is recommended that you inform your
local Trac administ
Hi folks,
On IRC, Florent Hivert reported that the Sage trac is reporting the
following error when clicking on the link "Timeline":
Opened and closed tickets event provider (TicketModule) failed:
ProgrammingError: could not write block 1 of temporary file: No space
left on device HINT: Perhaps ou
65 matches
Mail list logo
