Ok I understand what you're saying but this is not obvious from the
documentation which says : Return True if there is a natural map from
S to self. Otherwise, return False.
There is nothing in this sentence that says that the function is
actually changing something and stopping you from
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 11:28:41AM +0200, Viviane Pons wrote:
Ok I understand what you're saying but this is not obvious from the
documentation which says : Return True if there is a natural map from
S to self. Otherwise, return False.
There is nothing in this sentence that says that the
Hi Viviane!
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:14:50PM +0200, Viviane Pons wrote:
I'm working on root sytem friends on the patch I'm developing for
multivariate polynomials :
trac_6629_abstract_ring_of_multivariate_polynomials_with_several_bases_vp.patch
root system are used to
I'd just like to remind everyone:
Only the release manager should close tickets.
Tim Dumol has closed #7379, even though there was a sage library patch
there which needed to be merged. This is causing 4.5.rc0 to fail in
much worse ways than it should.
If you close tickets yourself you may be
I'm copying my reply to the Sage 4.5.rc0 thread:
Sorry! I was last informed that I could close notebook tickets that
are merged in a SageNB release. Since you closed #9430 (SageNB 0.8.1)
and said that it was merged in 4.5.rc0, I assumed that the Sage
library patch at #7379 was merged as well,
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Tim Joseph Dumol t...@timdumol.com wrote:
I'm copying my reply to the Sage 4.5.rc0 thread:
Sorry! I was last informed that I could close notebook tickets that
are merged in a SageNB release.
This would be a good reason for us to setup a separate trac server
This would be a good reason for us to setup a separate trac server for
the notebook.
I was thinking the same exact thing!
+1
--
Robert L. Miller
http://www.rlmiller.org/
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Niles Johnson nil...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello all,
I noticed some varying definitions of random_element for ZZ, QQ, and
RR (and probably other rings). This causes misleading documentation
(whch doctests don't catch, because the output is random!) and, for
On 12 July 2010 08:58, Robert Miller r...@rlmiller.org wrote:
I'd just like to remind everyone:
Only the release manager should close tickets.
Tim Dumol has closed #7379, even though there was a sage library patch
there which needed to be merged. This is causing 4.5.rc0 to fail in
much
On 12 July 2010 09:05, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_notebook
is a trac just for the notebook.
It's a broken link for me.
Dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
So you and William are interpreting this differently.
Dave,
I think you'll find that William and I have the same opinion about
closing tickets -- you're unfortunately trying to absolutely
generalize what I'm saying. You haven't caused any trouble by closing
tickets, but it is very easy for many
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:47 AM, David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
On 12 July 2010 09:05, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_notebook
is a trac just for the notebook.
It's a broken link for me.
It was a hypothetical link for everyone.
Dave
Hi Robert and William,
What does closing a ticket mean? Is it the same as providing a
resolution such as fixed, wontfix, duplicate? Or is closing the
ticket something that comes *after* providing a resolution?
If providing resolution and closing is the same, then I recently
closed a ticket out
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Simon King simon.k...@nuigalway.ie wrote:
Hi Robert and William,
What does closing a ticket mean? Is it the same as providing a
resolution such as fixed, wontfix, duplicate? Or is closing the
ticket something that comes *after* providing a resolution?
If
Dear sage-devel
this is continuation of
http://groups.google.cz/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/527f12e3b859bbb3/203fca703ceb1741
I would like to modify interact so that changing the input of interact
with auto_update=False does NOT remove the output computed for
previous data from the
This would be a good reason for us to setup a separate trac server for
the notebook. It's tempting. There's probably also a way to make it
so
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_notebook
is a trac just for the notebook.
However, at the very least one would want to have intense integration
Hi all,
I'm getting a bit confused about Parent objects and why
sage.schemes.generic.scheme.Scheme extends Parent.
Schemes are not really containers of anything, right? Calling
S.an_element() currently gives a NotImplementedError for most schemes,
and TestSuite(S).run() will give lots of
On Monday, July 12, 2010, Marco Streng marco.str...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm getting a bit confused about Parent objects and why
sage.schemes.generic.scheme.Scheme extends Parent.
Schemes are not really containers of anything, right?
A scheme is by definition a locally ring topological
On Jul 12, 10:20 am, Marco Streng marco.str...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm getting a bit confused about Parent objects and why
sage.schemes.generic.scheme.Scheme extends Parent.
Schemes are not really containers of anything, right? Calling
S.an_element() currently gives a
On Monday, July 12, 2010, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
This would be a good reason for us to setup a separate trac server for
the notebook. It's tempting. There's probably also a way to make it
so
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_notebook
is a trac just for the notebook.
However,
On 12 jul, 18:54, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 12, 2010, Marco Streng marco.str...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm getting a bit confused about Parent objects and why
sage.schemes.generic.scheme.Scheme extends Parent.
Schemes are not really containers of
If G is a graph and A = G.am() is its adjacency matrix and B =
G.complement().am() is
the adjacency matrix of its complement, then A+B should be a 01-
matrix. The code below
shows that sage does not always share this viewpoint.
Cheers
Chris
#
##
I realize this thread is 4 months old, but let me respond to this one
technical question:
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Simon King simon.k...@nuigalway.ie wrote:
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:24 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
I believe there is also some randomized testing that
I think there lies the problem :
sage: mcl_v = mcl.vertices()
sage: mclc_v = mcl.complement().vertices()
sage: mcl_v == mclc.v
False
So they are not equal. Do they contain the same elements ?
sage: Set(mcl_v) == Set(mclc_v)
True
So it seems... But then, what does THAT mean ?
sage:
On Jul 12, 12:59 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, July 12, 2010, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
This would be a good reason for us to setup a separate trac server for
the notebook. It's tempting. There's probably also a way to make it
so
I finally got a chance to test this on a clean 64-bit Ubuntu 10.04
(lucid) install.
I began by apt-get'ing the icedtea6-plugin, which pulls in a lot of
other packages such as the OpenJDK version of Java. A simple 3d plot
would not render in JMOL in the notebook, though the black square did
have
26 matches
Mail list logo
