[sage-devel] Access to old binaries

Hi, We test our library against Sage on Travis-CI, so we install it like this: wget -O- http://files.sagemath.org/linux/64bit/sage-6.9-x86_64-Linux-Ubuntu_12.04_64_bit.tar.lrz | lrzip -dq | tar x and lately the sage-6.9-x86_64-Linux-Ubuntu_12.04_64_bit.tar.lrz version is not available anymore,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Access to old binaries

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Volker Braun wrote: > We do delete old binaries to not over stay our welcome with the mirror > admins... > > I restored (note gz instead of lrz) > http://files.sagemath.org/linux/64bit/sage-6.9-x86_64-Linux-Ubuntu_12.04_64_bit.tar.gz Yes,

Re: [sage-devel] packaging vision (pip etc)

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:44 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: [Top-posted to stop threadjacking the SymEngine post] I'm sorry for doing that -- it was sort of relevant to his question, but starting a new

Re: [sage-devel] packaging vision (pip etc)

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:44 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: [Top-posted to stop threadjacking the SymEngine post] I'm sorry

Re: [sage-devel] packaging vision (pip etc)

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 8:08 PM, François Bissey francois.bis...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: On 08/17/15 09:46, Ondřej Čertík wrote: And my next question is what should we do currently to make it easy for Sage users to install SymEngine. Should we continue using the spkg to install the C

[sage-devel] SymEngine 0.1.0 released

Hi, We just released SymEngine 0.1.0: https://github.com/sympy/symengine/releases/tag/v0.1.0 SymEngine (https://github.com/sympy/symengine) is a standalone fast C++ symbolic manipulation library. Optional thin wrappers allow usage of the library from other languages, we currently have C,

Re: [sage-devel] The fastest way to expand((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25)

Hi Miguel, On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:03 PM, mmarco mma...@unizar.es wrote: It is much faster to work with absolute fields instead of towers of extensions: sage: K.sqrt3=QuadraticField(3) sage: F.sqrt5=K.extension(x^2-5) sage: R.a1,a2,a3,a4,a5 = F[] sage: %time

Re: [sage-devel] The fastest way to expand((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25)

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Vincent, On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Vincent Delecroix 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 2015-01-18 18:03 UTC+01:00, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com: Can you invent an example, that can't

Re: [sage-devel] The fastest way to expand((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25)

Hi Vincent, On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Vincent Delecroix 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ondrej, For such questions of Sage usage, it is better to discuss on ask.sagemath.org or sage-support. You can also deal with all algebraic numbers at once with QQbar sage: sqrt3 =

Re: [sage-devel] The fastest way to expand((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25)

Hi Vincent, On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Vincent Delecroix 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 2015-01-18 18:03 UTC+01:00, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com: Can you invent an example, that can't be converted to polynomials? Perhaps (a1+a2+a3+sqrt(5)*a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25? Still

Re: [sage-devel] The fastest way to expand((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25)

Hi Vincent, On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 1:18 AM, Vincent Delecroix 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote: Your example can be reduced to polynomials sage: K.sqrt3 = QuadraticField(3) sage: R.a1,a2,a3,a4,a5 = K[] sage: timeit((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt3*a5)^25) 5 loops, best of 3: 81 ms per loop That's cool,

[sage-devel] The fastest way to expand((a1+a2+a3+a4+sqrt(3)*a5)^25)

Hi, I was wondering what the fastest way is to do this benchmark in Sage: ┌┐ │ Sage Version 6.4, Release Date: 2014-11-14 │ │ Enhanced for SageMathCloud.│

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-cloud] Sympy needs to be updated in SMC and Sage

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:02 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Андрей Ширшов sh.andr@gmail.com wrote: Hello! There is the following example on http://docs.sympy.org/latest/modules/sets.html: from sympy import FiniteSet, EmptySet A = EmptySet()

Re: [sage-cloud] Re: [sage-devel] Re: SageMathCloud now open source

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:37 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 12:19 PM, mmarco mma...@unizar.es wrote: My impression is that open sourcing SMC wouldn't have a big impact on the business oportunity. The main niche of clients would be universities that want to

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

always absorb 2*pi*i*n into log(). But sometimes it might not be possible to completely absorb all these factors. Now let's apply this to the problems below: On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 26 November 2014 at 12:58, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Bill, I thought about this a lot (essentially I studied complex analysis from several books as well as consulted with many colleagues) and I figured out some answers to my questions. In the approach (A), you

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 25 November 2014 at 14:51, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... Try it this way: a*b = exp(?1) a = exp(?2) b

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 25 November 2014 at 01:11, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... I am not very interested in real numbers. I am

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 22 November 2014 at 12:34, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... FriCAS currently does not implement a symbolic 'conjugate

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 24 November 2014 at 17:43, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... In FriCAS 'abs' is already a kernel function

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 21 November 2014 at 20:18, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: I am still confused about one thing: is this issue is already present in FriCAS before your changes? Because you can already use conjugate

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

I've written up all the equations from this thread together with detailed step by step derivation: http://www.theoretical-physics.net/dev/math/complex.html e.g. the derivatives are here: http://www.theoretical-physics.net/dev/math/complex.html#complex-derivatives Most of the examples from this

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 20 November 2014 22:08, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... This problem can be reduced to finding an algorithm

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 20 November 2014 01:54, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: What you posted looks good. But we need to test it for arg(z), re(z), im(z) and any other non-analytic function that we can find. (1) - re(x

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: So here (20) is a simpler expression for derivative of arg: (16) - abs(x)==sqrt(x*conjugate(x)) Compiled code for abs has been cleared. Compiled code for arg has been cleared. 1 old definition(s) deleted

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: So here (20) is a simpler expression for derivative of arg: (16) - abs(x)==sqrt(x*conjugate(x)) Compiled code for abs has been cleared

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: Perhaps this is more or less where Richardson's theorem enters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richardson%27s_theorem We badly want a reliable way to determine when an expression is identically zero. In general this

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 20 November 2014 12:56, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: ... Can you give an example of an expression that cannot be decided by the Richardson's theorem? Well, no not exactly. Richardson's theorem

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 2014-11-19 9:36 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... Then I noticed that if we have f=z we get conjugate(z).diff(z) which is 0. So the 2nd term is 0 and the result is just the first Wirtinger

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: OK, this looks better! (1) - D(abs(x),x) _ x + x (1) --- 2abs(x) Type: Expression(Integer) (2) - D(conjugate(x),y) (2)

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: OK, this looks better! (1) - D(abs(x),x) _ x + x (1) --- 2abs(x

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 19 November 2014 21:23, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote: Since this mostly concerns FriCAS I am cross posting to that group. I will also post the patch there. For FriCAS list reference the original email

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:28 AM, David Roe roed.m...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 18 November 2014 09:02, David Roe roed.m...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: I

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 18 November 2014 12:29, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 9:28 AM, David Roe roed.m...@gmail.com wrote: ... Because derivative is not just used in the context of functions

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 18 November 2014 13:41, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: ... Have you had a chance to consider the issue of the chain

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 18 November 2014 13:41, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Bill Page bill.p

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 18 November 2014 15:19, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: abs(x).diff(x) would return the symbolic expression

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 18 November 2014 17:40, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: In my notation, the Wirtinger derivative is d f(z) / d z and d f(z) / d conjugate(z). The Df(z) / Dz is the complex derivative taking

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

Hi Bill, On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 14 November 2014 14:29, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Nov 14, 2014 11:30 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: What do you mean by the real derivative? The absolute value

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

I still don't understand exactly your proposal. We've played with a few ideas above, in particular we have considered at least (below d/dz is the Wirtinger derivative, d/dx and d/d(iy) are partial derivatives with respect to x or iy in z=x+i*y) : 1) d/dz 2) d/dz + d/d conjugate(z) = d/dx

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

Hi Bill, Thanks for the clarification. So your point is that 2) is not sufficient, that we really need two Wirtinger derivatives --- it's just that one can be expressed using the other and a conjugate, so perhaps CAS can only return one, but a chain rule needs modification and probably some other

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Nov 14, 2014 8:57 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 14 November 2014 02:19, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: ... Ok, thanks for the confirmation. There is an issue though

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Nov 14, 2014 11:30 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: On 14 November 2014 13:18, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Nov 14, 2014 8:57 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: It seems to me that we should forget about x and y. All we really need

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

at 12:17 AM, Clemens Heuberger clemens.heuber...@aau.at wrote: possibly related to http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12588 ? Regards, CH Am 2014-11-13 um 06:19 schrieb Ondřej Čertík: Hi, With Sage 6.3, I am getting: sage: abs(x).diff(x) x/abs(x) sage: abs(I*x).diff(x) -x/abs(I*x

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

Hi Bill, On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: It has always seemed very inconvenient to me that computer algebra programs such as Mathematica choose to define derivative as complex-derivative. I believe a reasonable alternative is what is known as a

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Bill, On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: It has always seemed very inconvenient to me that computer algebra programs such as Mathematica choose to define derivative

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: Sorry, I hit send before I was quite ready. To continue ... On 13 November 2014 19:24, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 6:56 PM, Bill Page bill.p...@newsynthesis.org wrote: Sorry, I hit send before I was quite ready. To continue ... On 13 November 2014 19:24, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote

[sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

Hi, With Sage 6.3, I am getting: sage: abs(x).diff(x) x/abs(x) sage: abs(I*x).diff(x) -x/abs(I*x) But abs(I*x) == abs(x). So also abs(x).diff(x) and abs(I*x).diff(x) must be the same. But in the first case we get x/abs(x), and in the second we got -x/abs(x). In SymPy, the answer is: In [1]:

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How to simplify square roots

Thanks Volker for the tip, that does the job. More comments below: On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 11:52 PM, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote: Be careful though: sage: (sqrt(-2)*sqrt(-3)).simplify_radical() -sqrt(3)*sqrt(2) i.e. you cannot use sqrt(a)*sqrt(b)=sqrt(a*b) everywhere without

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How to simplify square roots

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:23 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Ondřej Čertík ondrej.cer...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Volker for the tip, that does the job. More comments below: Another comment. Evidently Sage uses **Maxima** for rational_simplify

[sage-devel] How to simplify square roots

Hi, How do I simplify the following: sage: sqrt(3)/sqrt(15) 1/15*sqrt(15)*sqrt(3) sage: simplify(_) 1/15*sqrt(15)*sqrt(3) With sympy one gets: sqrt(3)/sqrt(15) sqrt(5)/5 The reason I am asking is that we are designing a very fast core in C++ (https://github.com/sympy/csympy) and so far we

Re: [sage-devel] Re: RFC: New Build/Packaging System

Hi Volker, Thanks for considering hashdist. Few comments: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: I've spent some time looking at hashdist which is probably the closest to what we need, but I don't think its the way to go for us right now. First, Sage

Re: [sage-devel] RFC: New Build/Packaging System

Hi Volker, I was also pointed to this thread. Aron answered pretty much everything, so just a few comments: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: For the record, Sage build a lot slower to build if you build packages one after the other. So hashdist

Re: [sage-devel] RFC: New Build/Packaging System

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, June 16, 2014 7:04:51 PM UTC+1, Ondřej Čertík wrote: Yes. You just modify the url field to your own mirror. No. I know that I want to download xyz.tar.gz, and I have a list of sage mirrors ranked by speed

Re: [sage-devel] RFC: New Build/Packaging System

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Aron Ahmadia a...@ahmadia.net wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: In particular its not possible to build from the already-existing git repo? I don't want to have to specify the version of sage-the-library, I just

Re: [sage-devel] RFC: New Build/Packaging System

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, June 16, 2014 8:40:34 PM UTC+1, Ondřej Čertík wrote: Volker, my understanding is that this would be useful for developing a package, to be able to quickly run a build, without committing. But for the end

[sage-devel] Best library for integer factorization (ecmfactor and the B1 parameter)

Hi, What is the state of the art library for factoring integers? I was under the impression, that it is the GCM-ECM library (http://ecm.gforge.inria.fr/). I've been trying to use ECM and I noticed the following behavior: sage: from sage.libs.libecm import ecmfactor sage: N = 121 sage: factor(N)

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Best library for integer factorization (ecmfactor and the B1 parameter)

trying one elliptic curve (see the docs). This is not going to be really useful by itself. sage: ecm.factor(121) [11, 11] Relevant discussion at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15443 On Thursday, January 30, 2014 6:35:46 PM UTC, Ondřej Čertík wrote: Hi, What is the state of the art

Re: [sage-devel] Should the Sage manual mention SageMathCloud?

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Robert Bradshaw rober...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 2:26 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Vincent Delecroix 20100.delecr...@gmail.com wrote: thought was that Sage is a math software, open source, with the

Re: [sage-devel] numpy 1.7.0 upgrade ticket is ready for review

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Francois Bissey francois.bis...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: After much time spent finding why numpy 1.6.x didn't like sage and some nice cooperation with numpy upstream we have an upgrade path for numpy. It couldn't have happened before the merging of the new

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Access to SPARC 64

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Fernando Perez fperez@gmail.com wrote: Hi Ondrej, On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com wrote: There are such machines on skynet, e.g. mark. -bash-3.00$ uname -a SunOS mark 5.10 Generic_127111-01 sun4u sparc

[sage-devel] Access to SPARC 64

the NumPy list. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Ondrej On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: On 8/30/12 10:10 PM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: Hi, Does anyone have a SPARC 64 machine that I could have an access to, so that I can try

Re: [sage-devel] GCC package (#12369) needs review

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Jeroen Demeyer jdeme...@cage.ugent.be wrote: On 2012-04-10 11:46, Ondřej Čertík wrote: What is your opinion on this thread: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/9CBKLU6LYkU/HNhJBKJ45VMJ What do you mean specifically?  It's a long thread, many things

Re: [sage-devel] GCC package (#12369) needs review

Hi Jeroen, On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Jeroen Demeyer jdeme...@cage.ugent.be wrote: I have made a spkg for GCC (GNU compiler collection) version 4.6.3 with compilers for C, C++ and Fortran.  We don't always build GCC, by default only on systems where this is needed or which have an old

Re: [sage-devel] Re: MathICS: A free, light-weight (online) alternative to Mathematica with support for Sage

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:01 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:35 PM, leif not.rea...@online.de wrote: On 31 Mrz., 22:13, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, March 31, 2012 7:11:23 PM UTC+1, kcrisman wrote: therefore lack the “structural

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage single Cell Server feedback

* the blue line for interact (the server is computing) is not very intuitive for me, it took me a while to realize that this is what it means Originally we put it there since we can have nested interacts, and the blue line helps visually separate the nesting.  The other day I thought that

[sage-devel] Sage single Cell Server feedback

Hi, I just noticed (when testing a link to sagemath.org from my webpage) the single Cell Server: http://sagemath.org/eval.html so I played with it a little bit and I think this is really cool. Here is some feedback: * There should be more examples with interact (I would create a topic

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-support] Re: public single cell server

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: On 7/29/11 5:11 PM, Jason Grout wrote: Hi everyone, I'd like to announce a trial beta run of a public single cell server: http://sagemath.org:5467/ The idea is that this is a single cell that can very easily

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Femhub

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Eviatar eviatarb...@gmail.com wrote: I guess by modular I meant that the different components can be installed separately, which is not really the case with Sage (except with the extra spkgs). I like the all-in-one approach better anyways but, like you said,

Re: [sage-devel] Femhub

Hi Thierry, On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Thierry Dumont tdum...@math.univ-lyon1.fr wrote: Hello, I juts read that Femhub (http://code.google.com/p/femhub/ and many other urls) uses parts of Sage. But is there any project to integrate it in the Sage distribution (as optional package, for

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Femhub

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:19 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Eviatar eviatarb...@gmail.com wrote: Just out of curiosity: why are you forking a separate project instead of developing Sage? I think the main issue is that Sage contains a lot of