I followed the instructions from
http://wiki.sagemath.org/combinat/Installation
and ran into a problem (see below for the dump) when installing the
patches on top of a mint 4.1.1. The folder that is looked after
doesn't exist (actually, not even /Users/Shared/sage , my install
folder is
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 08:56:02AM -0700, Paul-Olivier Dehaye wrote:
I followed the instructions from
http://wiki.sagemath.org/combinat/Installation
and ran into a problem (see below for the dump) when installing the
patches on top of a mint 4.1.1. The folder that is looked after
doesn't
I followed the instructions from
http://wiki.sagemath.org/combinat/Installation
and ran into a problem (see below for the dump) when installing the
patches on top of a mint 4.1.1. The folder that is looked after
doesn't exist (actually, not even /Users/Shared/sage , my install
folder
Tom Boothby wrote:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Robert
Bradshawrober...@math.washington.edu wrote:
As for the question at hand, I'm personally not convinced this is useful
enough to merit another departure from pure Python. It also risks turning
the valid Python expression x!=120 into
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Em, I thought I'd try this in Mathematica
In[1]:= 5!
Out[1]= 120
In[2]:= 5!!
Out[2]= 15
In[3]:= 5!!!
Out[3]= 1307674368000
In[4]:= 5
Out[4]= 2027025
In[5]:= 5!
spends a long time doing whatever it is trying to compute.
Anyone
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Em, I thought I'd try this in Mathematica
In[1]:= 5!
Out[1]= 120
In[2]:= 5!!
Out[2]= 15
In[3]:= 5!!!
Out[3]= 1307674368000
In[4]:= 5
Out[4]= 2027025
In[5]:= 5!
spends a long time doing whatever it is trying to compute.
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Em, I thought I'd try this in Mathematica
In[1]:= 5!
Out[1]= 120
In[2]:= 5!!
Out[2]= 15
In[3]:= 5!!!
Out[3]= 1307674368000
In[4]:= 5
Out[4]= 2027025
In[5]:= 5!
spends a long time doing whatever it is trying to compute.
On Sep 1, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Em, I thought I'd try this in Mathematica
In[1]:= 5!
Out[1]= 120
In[2]:= 5!!
Out[2]= 15
In[3]:= 5!!!
Out[3]= 1307674368000
In[4]:= 5
Out[4]= 2027025
In[5]:= 5!
I get the following error message when i execute make in the sage
source folder :
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -D__GMP_WITHIN_GMPXX -I.. -m32 -O2 -
fomit-frame-pointer -mtune=pentium3 -march=pentium3 -c isfuns.cc -
fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/isfuns.o
In file included from isfuns.cc:26:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:45 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
This is a known problem. You can get around it by commenting out the line
that imports cliquer in
devel/sage/sage/graphs/all.py
That's what I did for the OS X 64-bit binary that is posted.
After some
On Sep 2, 4:12 am, Dan Drake dr...@kaist.edu wrote:
Does anybody know what happened to the KAIST mirror?
I haven't heard anything from them and have no idea. The mirror
manager script checks all mirrors every 10 minutes and looks, if it
is online and the timestamp is correct. You can see its
Hi Minh,
On Sep 2, 8:41 am, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
After some experimentation and reading, I got Sage 4.1.1 to build in
64-bit mode under OS X 10.5.8. I used Michael Abshoff's custom-built
Fortran spkg as documented at
http://wiki.sagemath.org/osx64
I have written
Hi!
On Sep 2, 7:40 am, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
Wow, that seems totally ambiguous. Is 5!!! equal to (5!!)! or (5!)!! or
((5!)!)! The notation is pretty bad in this case.
[...]
Yes, and this is why the very common notation 5! is bad syntax that
should be avoided in a
Hi all,
On Thursday 10th, the Groupe Thématique Logiciel Libre Île-de-France
(a task force whose purpose is to foster the open source software
ecosystem, in Paris and around) organizes a gathering of the actors of
open source, developers and companies. Their goal is to let
multi-partner
Hi Nicolas,
2009/9/2 Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr:
SNIP
Suggestions? Standard slides anyone for such a presentation? Project
ideas for such services?
Perhaps the talks wiki page can help:
http://wiki.sagemath.org/Talks
William Stein has delivered many such talks:
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 at 11:42PM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
If we support the ! notation, we should either have x!! == (x!)! or,
preferably, x!!..! be the multi factorial (not limiting ourselves to
single and double).
I study combinatorics, and I'm fine with *not* supporting ! notation.
On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 at 01:04AM -0700, Harald Schilly wrote:
On Sep 2, 4:12 am, Dan Drake dr...@kaist.edu wrote:
Does anybody know what happened to the KAIST mirror?
I haven't heard anything from them and have no idea. The mirror
manager script checks all mirrors every 10 minutes and looks,
Hi,
This is from sage-support
On Sep 1, 11:35 pm, Mani chandra mchan...@iitk.ac.in wrote:
sage: x = a + I*b
sage: real(x.conjugate().simplify())
real_part(a) + imag_part(b)
sage: real(x.conjugate())
real_part(a) - imag_part(b)
-
This seems to be happening because maxima(via
2009/9/2 Dan Drake dr...@kaist.edu:
On Tue, 01 Sep 2009 at 11:42PM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
If we support the ! notation, we should either have x!! == (x!)! or,
preferably, x!!..! be the multi factorial (not limiting ourselves to
single and double).
I study combinatorics, and I'm fine
Anyway, thanks again for all of your hard work on this! Sage has come a
long ways because of it.
+1. As thick as the web of the current plot code is, the actual
functioning is very good in nearly all normal cases, as witness how
picky we can afford to be with matplotlib; doing that from
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 07:09:17PM +1000, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
2009/9/2 Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr:
SNIP
Suggestions? Standard slides anyone for such a presentation? Project
ideas for such services?
Perhaps the talks wiki page can help:
Okay, some of their hardware went south:
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 20:39:24 +0900
From: 신재호 jaeho.s...@gmail
To: Dan Drake dr...@kaist
Subject: Re: ftp.kaist.ac.kr mirror of sagemath.org not working
Hi Dan,
These are known problems, and we are working on them.
One of our disks has failed
Sorry, please disregard my previous message. I just found the following
plastered all over my terminal window:
WARNING:
Make sure to create a ~/.hgrc file:
--
[ui]
username = William Stein wst...@gmail.com
But clearly Mathemaitca shows there is some ambiguity about how
multiple exclamation marks are used.
Yes, unfortunately math is filled with such contextual ambiguity and/
or conflicting conventions (for instance, is i an indexing integer or
a root of -1?). I'm usually all for multiple
2009/9/2 Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 07:09:17PM +1000, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
2009/9/2 Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr:
SNIP
Suggestions? Standard slides anyone for such a presentation? Project
ideas for such
I wonder what the OP in the previous thread has for an OS, as well as
for you. That's because the code mentioned there in calculus/
calculus.py
maxima = Maxima(init_code = ['display2d:false; domain: complex;
keepfloat:
true; load(topoly_solver)'],
script_subdirectory=None)
2009/9/1 Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com
William Stein wrote:
2009/9/1 Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com
mailto:jason-s...@creativetrax.com
William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Jason Grout
jason-s...@creativetrax.com
Hi Sage-Devel,
Here's an encouraging email about Sage that went out to the Univ of Maryland
math department yesterday.
William
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark Tilmes
Date: Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 2:45 PM
Subject: New Mathematical software, Sage
To: mathus...@math.umd.edu
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:07 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Sage-Devel,
Here's an encouraging email about Sage that went out to the Univ of Maryland
math department yesterday.
Incidentally, we were recently notified via IRC in #sage-devel that
the University of Tennessee at
2009/9/1 Paulo César Pereira de Andrade
paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com
Hi,
The package I am building uses newer versions of several components,
and while I believe most of these tests probably are correct, I may be
missing some patch, so, if you can confirm it is correct, or is
Hi Jason,
Thanks for the great work!
Just to add to the axis labels problem you mentioned, the following
does not display the y-axis label for me (in notebook):
P = plot(1.5*x + 0.003,(x,0,0.075))
P.axes_labels(['$\delta_c$ (m)', '$\delta_h$ (m)'])
P
Changing the xmax value a little bit makes
FYI the Maxima functions conjugate, realpart/imagpart, cabs/carg
have been revised recently. Maybe you can try it with the most recent
version (5.19.2). For the purposes of debugging I think it's best if
you
use Maxima directly instead of going through Sage.
On Sep 2, 5:49 am, Golam Mortuza
doc/en/constructions/rings.rst +58
sage: R = singular.ring(97, '(a,b,c,d)', 'lp')
sage: I = singular.ideal(['a+b+c+d', 'ab+ad+bc+cd',
'abc+abd+acd+bcd', 'abcd-1'])
sage: R
Expected:
// characteristic : 97
// number of vars : 4
//block 1 : ordering
Hi there,
I just received this e-mail about a computer algebra conference in Germany in
2010.
The bottomline:
So let me kindly ask if you/your company/organisation basically would be
interested to contribute to this event, in terms of talks, exhibitions, or
financial support.
It sounds
2009/9/2 kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com:
But clearly Mathemaitca shows there is some ambiguity about how
multiple exclamation marks are used.
Yes, unfortunately math is filled with such contextual ambiguity and/
or conflicting conventions (for instance, is i an indexing integer or
a root of
On Sep 2, 11:02 am, Robert Dodier robert.dod...@gmail.com wrote:
FYI the Maxima functions conjugate, realpart/imagpart, cabs/carg
have been revised recently. Maybe you can try it with the most recent
version (5.19.2). For the purposes of debugging I think it's best if
you
use Maxima
Stan Schymanski wrote:
Hi Jason,
Thanks for the great work!
Just to add to the axis labels problem you mentioned, the following
does not display the y-axis label for me (in notebook):
P = plot(1.5*x + 0.003,(x,0,0.075))
P.axes_labels(['$\delta_c$ (m)', '$\delta_h$ (m)'])
P
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Dr. David
Kirkbydavid.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
In[7]:= 5!!!
Out[7]= 1307674368000
In[8]:= (5!!)!
Out[8]= 1307674368000
In[9]:= 5
Out[9]= 2027025
In[10]:= (5!!)!!
Out[10]= 2027025
Yuck. -1 to compatibility with this. All or nothing -- if
Yes,
I do agree that uintptr_t is a better choice.
It's also part of the ISO C99's Stdint.h. Note that we only would
need this latter header (or rather the type(def)s contained therein),
and possibly the corresponding printf formatting magic. ISO C99 is a
standard for a decade now.
Even if some
Sorry to be replying to my own post, but in case you need more
arguments supporting (a) above, note that upgrading the spkg's solves
the issues listed at tickets #780, #3718, #6165, #6420, and #6423.
And it makes #3587 look much better. Great work getting the new
Maxima in!
- kcrisman
Hi all,
I noticed that iterating over a finite field gives a different order
depending on the implementation:
sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field_prime_modn.FiniteField_prime_modn
(7))
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field.FiniteField_givaro(7))
[0, 3, 2, 6, 4, 5, 1]
sage:
I think that a CAS without a strong programming language is nothing
but a simple pocket calculator. Therefore, if a mathematical notation
interferes too much with the requirements of the underlying
programming language, then the mathematical notation should be
dropped.
I vote +1 for this
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:13 PM, kcrismankcris...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW in order for conjugate friends to recognize variables as
complex, probably it is necessary to declare them as such
(i.e. declare(foo, complex)). I think domain:complex won't have
the same effect. Maybe Sage is
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, YannLC wrote:
Hi all,
I noticed that iterating over a finite field gives a different order
depending on the implementation:
sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field_prime_modn.FiniteField_prime_modn
(7))
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
sage:
Ralf,
I just completed a full compile of FriCAS rev. 666 from source with
ECL 9.8.4 including the Aldor interface. It finished with no problems
and seems to run fine.
So what is failing at the moment seems to be building the Aldor
interface from a *cached lisp* distribution created with:
Hi
Sage-support did not solicit an answer.
Both of these seem wrong:
Is this the intended behaviour?
sage: z=1.+sqrt(-1); print z; z.base_ring()
1.00 + 1.00*I
Symbolic Ring
sage: z=1.+sqrt(-1.); print z; z.base_ring()
1.00 + 1.00*I
Real Field
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Jan Groenewald j...@aims.ac.za wrote:
Hi
Sage-support did not solicit an answer.
Both of these seem wrong:
Is this the intended behaviour?
sage: z=1.+sqrt(-1); print z; z.base_ring()
1.00 + 1.00*I
Symbolic Ring
sage:
47 matches
Mail list logo
