[sage-combinat-devel] Sage grant

2014-10-28 Thread Anne Schilling
Dear All! Dan Bump, Ben Salisbury, Mark Shimozono and I are planning to apply for an NSF grant for Sage (to fund Sage Days and other Sage related activities). We will mostly focus on topics in combinatorics/algebra/ representation theory. It would be great to hear from you what your wishlists are

[sage-devel] Can't compile sage on OS X 10.10

2014-10-28 Thread 'Paul Mercat' via sage-devel
Hello ! I tried to compile the lastest development version of sage on my computer with OS X 10.10, and I get the following very strange error : see config.log I precise that the C-compiler works on my computer : I have try to compile a small example to test it and it works. I hope somebody

[sage-devel] Re: Can't compile sage on OS X 10.10

2014-10-28 Thread Volker Braun
See https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/bHkz8Dwv5Mg/tQ4zIvGY4OIJ On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 11:08:53 AM UTC, Paul Mercat wrote: Hello ! I tried to compile the lastest development version of sage on my computer with OS X 10.10, and I get the following very strange error : see

Re: [sage-devel] Re: __cmp__ vs. __eq__ in element class

2014-10-28 Thread Volker Braun
On Monday, October 27, 2014 10:45:40 PM UTC, Nils Bruin wrote: In general I expect that cached_methods should preprocess their arguments a bit before doing a key lookup anyway (such as do the required coercions on arguments). Most of the time, functions with arguments should *not* be

[sage-devel] Reopening a closed ticket

2014-10-28 Thread Michael Orlitzky
Is it possible to reopen a closed ticket? #8005 was closed without a doctest, so I've added one. But now it won't let me change the status to needs_review again. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-devel group. To unsubscribe from this group and

Re: [sage-devel] Reopening a closed ticket

2014-10-28 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2014-10-28 14:30, Michael Orlitzky wrote: Is it possible to reopen a closed ticket? #8005 was closed without a doctest, so I've added one. But now it won't let me change the status to needs_review again. Open a new ticket instead. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to

Re: [sage-devel] Reopening a closed ticket

2014-10-28 Thread Michael Orlitzky
On 10/28/2014 09:33 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: On 2014-10-28 14:30, Michael Orlitzky wrote: Is it possible to reopen a closed ticket? #8005 was closed without a doctest, so I've added one. But now it won't let me change the status to needs_review again. Open a new ticket instead. Ok,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: __cmp__ vs. __eq__ in element class

2014-10-28 Thread Volker Braun
On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 5:16:47 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote: class CoercingDict: def __init__(self, f): self.f = f self.data = dict() def __setitem__(self, key, value): self.data[self.f(key)] = value Thats manual

[sage-devel] determinant calculation, was: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians [...]

2014-10-28 Thread Robert Dodier
On 2014-10-25, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: http://www.ams.org/notices/201410/rnoti-p1249.pdf P.S. It would be interesting to see if Sage can do the calculation they identified as buggy in mathematica. That would make for a cool follow-up editorial. I've reimplemnted

Re: [sage-devel] Re: __cmp__ vs. __eq__ in element class

2014-10-28 Thread Erik Massop
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 5:16:47 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote: class CoercingDict: def __init__(self, f): self.f = f self.data = dict() def

[sage-devel] Histogram plots ready for review

2014-10-28 Thread kcrisman
After an unending saga of many people not wanting to bother to wrap histograms, we now have yet another - but hopefully canonical - implementation. Hopefully people will want to review this, given there are quite a few relevant questions on

Re: [sage-devel] Re: __cmp__ vs. __eq__ in element class

2014-10-28 Thread Volker Braun
The language is explained here http://www.sagemath.org/doc/tutorial/tour_coercion.html#conversion-versus-coercion On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 8:06:44 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote: sage: s = Sequence([], QQ) sage: s.append(QQ(3)) # no coercion or conversion sage: s.extend([int(1), ZZ(2)]) #

Re: [sage-devel] Re: __cmp__ vs. __eq__ in element class

2014-10-28 Thread Erik Massop
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:24:18 -0700 (PDT) Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote: The language is explained here http://www.sagemath.org/doc/tutorial/tour_coercion.html#conversion-versus- coercion Thanks! On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 8:06:44 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote: sage: s =

Re: [sage-devel] Re: __cmp__ vs. __eq__ in element class

2014-10-28 Thread Volker Braun
On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 10:02:11 PM UTC, Erik Massop wrote: P.S. Addition (concatenation) of sequences converts to lists. Is that the intended behavior? I don't really want to hold up Sequence as the optimal implementation of a coercing container, its just the only one that we have.

[sage-devel] Sage grant

2014-10-28 Thread Anne Schilling
Dear All! Dan Bump, Ben Salisbury, Mark Shimozono and I are planning to apply for an NSF grant for Sage (to fund Sage Days and other Sage related activities). We will mostly focus on topics in combinatorics/algebra/ representation theory. It would be great to hear from you what your wishlists are