[sage-devel] Re: Question about number_field_elements_from_algebraics (Ticket 20181)

I misread this as "getting_number_field_elements_from_algebraists"... On Monday, April 9, 2018 at 5:10:07 PM UTC+1, jplab wrote: > > Dear all, > > In order to get algebraic polyhedra using the normaliz backend [1], we > modify the function > > number_field_elements_from_algebraics of qqbar.py to

[sage-combinat-devel] Re: End(CombinatorialFreeModule)?

On Thursday, December 6, 2012 at 12:47:53 PM UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On 2012-12-06, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 07:29:57AM +, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > >> I wonder if one can actually work in the endomorphism ring/algebra of a > >>

[sage-devel] Proper uninstallation of SPKGs

Hi all, I'd like to call attention to a new ticket I've added, #25139 [1] which proposes to add a new mechanism for *cleanly* uninstalling already installed SPKGs (particularly optional/experimental packages, though it can be used for standard packages as well--not that you generally should).

Re: [sage-devel] Integrating SageMath into existing Python install / Python compiling error

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Jordan Argyle wrote: > My immediate issue is that I tried to compile SageMath from the Github (git > clone https://github.com/sagemath/sage.git), and it broke trying to compile > Python. Logs are attached. Note that I tried to build python 3

Re: [sage-devel] PEP draft to fix Python function classes

Hello Erik, First of all, some updates. There is an actual PEP now: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0575/ I already started on an implementation: https://github.com/jdemeyer/cpython/tree/pep575 On 2018-04-09 19:03, Erik Bray wrote: The one thing I keep questioning is whether it makes