Hi,
Le 05/12/2014 21:45, maldun a écrit :
I agree with you that it is not that important as it was some years ago.
Nevertheless be aware that many professional users in engineering
and research can't go online that simply, because of security reasons, and
company policies (I know that from
Hi,
If I read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risch_algorithm
I understand that : f=x/(sqrt(x^4+10*x^2-96*x-71)) has an anti-primitive.
I do not have maple, so I do nt know if Maple can integrate it; bur
sage cannot:
f=x/(sqrt(x^4+10*x^2-96*x-71))
integral(f,x)
integrate(x/sqrt(x^4 +
Hi!
Since yesterday evening (middle European time) I try to do git trac
push for #15820. It fails, and as usual it gives no error message.
Is that a problem on my side (if so: How to track it down?), or is
something wrong with trac?
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this message because you are
Hello devs,
I hope someone here knows how the certificate system works for https
connections.
I am raising this question because of the Let's Encrypt announcement
[1] made by EFF last month. It would make it easier to recommend the secure
mode for the sage notebook. Currently, all browsers
El sábado, 6 de diciembre de 2014 09:57:09 UTC+1, tdumont escribió:
Hi,
If I read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risch_algorithm
I understand that : f=x/(sqrt(x^4+10*x^2-96*x-71)) has an anti-primitive.
I do not have maple, so I do nt know if Maple can integrate it; bur
sage
I hope someone here knows how the certificate system works for https
connections.
I am raising this question because of the Let's Encrypt announcement
[1] made by EFF last month. It would make it easier to recommend the secure
mode for the sage notebook. Currently, all browsers give
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:59:14 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote:
If FriCAS is right now the best software for computing these kind of
integrals, it might be worth the effort to include it as standard package,
write a good interface and adapt the integrate methods to use it, at least
as a
On 5 December 2014 at 21:45, maldun dom...@gmx.net wrote:
I agree with you that it is not that important as it was some years ago.
Nevertheless be aware that many professional users in engineering
and research can't go online that simply, because of security reasons, and
company policies (I
On 5 December 2014 at 20:48, 'Martin R' via sage-devel
sage-devel@googlegroups.com wrote:
A famous example is
integrate(x/sqrt(x^4+10*x^2+-96*x-71),x)
which Mathematica won't do, although it is elementary, i.e., has a
solution in terms of elementary functions:
I came across the following
{{{
R.x = ZZ[]
S.t = R.quo(x^2+5)
S in IntegralDomains()
False
}}}
and even simpler
{{{
R=Zmod(5)
R in IntegralDomains()
False
}}}
This is related to
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-algebra/6C3XkkLfllw
but I couldn't find what ticket it is associated
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 4:30:35 PM UTC+1, bluescarni wrote:
- I imagine if you calculate it as an elliptic integral (say, using the
Weierstrassian functions) you would end up with elliptic invariants g1 and
g2 with special values that make the elliptic integral collapse to an
Hi,
I don't know which of the following is better in the three M's as I have
close to no experience with them, but I suspect at least the documentation
part is...
- Dima Pasechnik mentioned representation theory of associative algebras,
but even linear algebra over fields is not implemented
Hey Ben,
I came across the following
{{{
R.x = ZZ[]
S.t = R.quo(x^2+5)
S in IntegralDomains()
False
}}}
This was an easy fix since we do the primitive test when constructing the
quotient. This is http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17450 which is
needs_review.
and even simpler
{{{
We should support the let's encrypt project asap, though it is launching
in 2015...
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 10:10:54 AM UTC, P Purkayastha wrote:
Hello devs,
I hope someone here knows how the certificate system works for https
connections.
I am raising this question because
Hello,
I just discover FriCAS and its tremendous possibilities. I just updated the
package that we ship we Sage from version 0.3.1 to version 1.2.4 (more
information at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/9465). It might become a
more standard package.
I have a very naive question: the version of
The installation instructions say that ecl is roughly 3 times slower. Once
upon a time, when I was a fricas contributor, it made quite a difference.
But back than, sbcl was a no-go for sage (I forgot why).
I still love fricas' language. I never underrstood why Python succeeded
and Aldor
Maybe one reason to prefer ecl is that it is embeddable, which could allow us
to have a much faster interface than pexpect?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-devel group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
I'm not sure that fricas *has* to be a package : the current versins (6.4,
6.5beta) already have the fricas interface compiled in :
/usr/local/sage-6.5/src/build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7/sage/interfaces/fricas.py
/usr/local/sage-6.5/src/sage/interfaces/fricas.py
Le samedi 6 décembre 2014 15:38:20 UTC+1, Ralf Stephan a écrit :
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:59:14 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote:
If FriCAS is right now the best software for computing these kind of
integrals, it might be worth the effort to include it as standard package,
write a good
sage: fricas.integrate(x^2,x).unparsed_input_form()
'(1/3)*x^3'
Or, more usefully :
sage: toto=eval(preparse(fricas.integrate(x^2,x).unparsed_input_form())) ;
toto
1/3*x^3
sage: parent(toto)
Symbolic Ring
sage: type(toto)
type 'sage.symbolic.expression.Expression'
which might be the
On 12/06/2014 06:23 PM, 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a very naive question: the version of lisp we have in Sage is ecl,
does it make a huge difference with sbcl ?
I'd say yes. But it's probably Waldek who has more knowledge of ecl vs.
sbcl. I only remember that compilation (at least
Le samedi 6 décembre 2014 19:01:46 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit :
I'm not sure that fricas *has* to be a package : the current versins (6.4,
6.5beta) already have the fricas interface compiled in :
/usr/local/sage-6.5/src/build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.7/sage/interfaces/fricas.py
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Emmanuel Charpentier
emanuel.charpent...@gmail.com wrote:
Le samedi 6 décembre 2014 19:01:46 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit :
I'm not sure that fricas *has* to be a package : the current versins (6.4,
6.5beta) already have the fricas interface compiled
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:13:27 AM UTC-8, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
Ahem. I have to retract that : if we want to add an 'algorithm=fricas'
option to sage's integrate(), fricas just *has* to be there as a standard
package.
There is precedent otherwise. For instance
On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Ralf Hemmecke r...@hemmecke.org wrote:
On 12/06/2014 06:23 PM, 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a very naive question: the version of lisp we have in Sage is ecl,
does it make a huge difference with sbcl ?
In fact, I don't see any embeddable advantage of
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 9:33:57 AM UTC-8, Martin R wrote:
The installation instructions say that ecl is roughly 3 times slower.
Once upon a time, when I was a fricas contributor, it made quite a
difference. But back than, sbcl was a no-go for sage (I forgot why).
I think it was
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:04:31 AM UTC-8, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
I'd say yes. But it's probably Waldek who has more knowledge of ecl vs.
sbcl. I only remember that compilation (at least some years ago) with
ecl took quite a bit longer than with sbcl.
Yes, ecl tends to be quite slow
Thanks. I've reviewed #17450 and opened #17453 for the integer mod rings.
On Saturday, December 6, 2014 11:39:21 AM UTC-5, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
Hey Ben,
I came across the following
{{{
R.x = ZZ[]
S.t = R.quo(x^2+5)
S in IntegralDomains()
False
}}}
This was an easy fix since we
28 matches
Mail list logo
