Le jeudi 27 novembre 2014 02:46:26 UTC+1, Robert Dodier a écrit :
On 2014-11-26, Han Frederic h...@math.jussieu.fr javascript: wrote:
Hi, I have tried the factorization with giacpy. (cf trac 12375).
I had to expexpand first before factoring and did this:
sage: from giacpy import
Hi,
On 2014-11-27, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, what is felt as loud by one is not loud for
another, so you cannot just hit everybody whenever that happens.
Different cultures.. We certainly saw that in the recent posts.
+1
In another post, someone referred to a code of
On Thursday, 27 November 2014 18:45:44 UTC+11, Simon King wrote:
Hi Andrew,
On 2014-11-27, Andrew andrew...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
Speaking only for myself, it is exactly this sort of post that I would
like
to avoid. Why can't the person who gets loud taker a breather, calm
Hi Andrew,
On 2014-11-27, Andrew andrew.mat...@gmail.com wrote:
Because s/he is, for whatever reason, not able to. S/he is doing a
mistake. But this can not be an excuse for people to commit the same
mistake, even though they would be able to avoid it.
Hi Simon, You seem to be saying
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 8:06:31 PM UTC, john_perry_usm wrote:
I would propose the following:
*f.coeffs?* should state something to the effect of, Returns all the
coefficients of a dense representation of f.
*f.coefficients?* should state something like, Returns all the
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 8:53:39 PM UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
To the contary, I have seen way too much of this shit in my youth, FYI.
Laws of the pioneers of the Soviet Union,
Moral codex of a young builder of Communism,
Funny that you mention it, but I always noticed many
It seems to me that as a general principle, a method whose name is an
abbreviation of the name of another method should actually be the same
method. Anything else is hugely confusing to a user. Both the
functionalities described are, of course, useful, but giving them such
similar names has
Le 27/11/2014 10:47, Nathann Cohen a écrit :
It seems to me that as a general principle, a method whose name is an
abbreviation of the name of another method should actually be the same
method. Anything else is hugely confusing to a user. Both the
functionalities described are, of course,
Of course, proposing the statu quo may be unpopular ;-). Another solution I
can propose is to keep f.coefficients() as it is, make f.coeffs() an alias
of the former, and only keep f.list() for the list of all the coefficients.
If I understand what you said, you want coefficients to be left
Le 27/11/2014 11:29, Nathann Cohen a écrit :
Of course, proposing the statu quo may be unpopular ;-). Another solution I
can propose is to keep f.coefficients() as it is, make f.coeffs() an alias
of the former, and only keep f.list() for the list of all the coefficients.
If I understand what
On 2014-11-27, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
--=_Part_139_1145915590.1417081457926
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary==_Part_140_769974834.1417081457926
--=_Part_140_769974834.1417081457926
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Wednesday,
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 12:25:52 PM UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
In any case, that is just another example of cultural baggage. Which is
neither good nor bad, its just how things are.
Rather, it's another example of psychological trauma. It has little to do
with culture (well, a lot
Hi Volker,
On 2014-11-27, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Definition from wikipedia/IFAC: Principles, values, standards, or rules of
behavior that guide the decisions, procedures and systems of an
organization in a way that (a) contributes to the welfare of its key
stakeholders,
On Wednesday, November 26, 2014 5:28:28 PM UTC, Simon King wrote:
What you seem to not understand, Volker, is that Sage has grown far
beyond a US project. So, a code of conduct is an American thing is not a
good argument for having a code of conduct.
But we do communicate in English, so
Hi Volker,
On 2014-11-27, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, principles can be good or bad. We all have (written or unwritten)
principles, values, standards, and rules. Whats your point?
I guess that's *not* the point.
I didn't have time to read the page on the communist code,
Hi Dima,
On 2014-11-27, Dima Pasechnik dimp...@gmail.com wrote:
The following fits quite well here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Code_of_the_Builder_of_Communism
Thank you for the link. It indeed has a considerable overlap with other
codes of conduct.
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received
Hi Volker,
On 2014-11-27, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
But we do communicate in English, so we can't really avoid using anglosaxon
organizational concepts.
I refuse the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Moreover, we do not communicate in
English as native speakers. So, I absolutely see no
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 1:50:06 PM UTC, Simon King wrote:
I refuse the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
Please define which version you are talking about.
Nobody takes linguistic determinism serious nowadays. But linguistic and
cultural relativism are a thing whether you like it or not.
--
But we do communicate in English, so we can't really avoid using anglosaxon
organizational concepts.
I am in India right now. Here, indians often speak english with each
other as it is often their only common language.
Of course, they drive on the left. But I expect that you would find
quite
On 2014-11-27, Volker Braun vbraun.n...@gmail.com wrote:
Nobody takes linguistic determinism serious nowadays. But linguistic and
cultural relativism are a thing whether you like it or not.
AFAIK the relativism only (or at least: mainly) holds for native speakers. So,
you have not answered to
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 2:10:59 PM UTC, Simon King wrote:
AFAIK the relativism only (or at least: mainly) holds for native speakers.
So,
you have not answered to my argument that using a Lingua Franca is
absolutely no reason to adopt organisational principles that seem
fashionable
Hi Volker,
Am Donnerstag, 27. November 2014 15:28:38 UTC+1 schrieb Volker Braun:
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 2:10:59 PM UTC, Simon King wrote:
AFAIK the relativism only (or at least: mainly) holds for native
speakers. So,
you have not answered to my argument that using a Lingua Franca
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 2:23:09 AM UTC-8, Bruno Grenet wrote:
While I agree that the current names can be confusing, we have to be
careful not to make something even more confusing. As mentioned earlier
by John, f.coefficients() is correlated with f.exponents() and I think
it is a
http://wiki.sagemath.org/CodeOfConduct
It is funny: someone called it the Code of Contact on this link (I
changed it since it referred to the original)! Since so many people are
discussing the name and the oppressive meaning it has for them, we could
indeed do a play on words!
Also,
Also, Simon, in your way of doing things, in my experience if one does
not respond to an inappropriate message, then others will and discussions
go in all sorts of directions. So if a discussion was kind of shut down by
a rude post, how should one proceed? I would like to try that experiment!
2014-11-27 18:08 GMT+01:00 Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com:
Also, Simon, in your way of doing things, in my experience if one does
not respond to an inappropriate message, then others will and discussions
go in all sorts of directions. So if a discussion was kind of shut down by
a
On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 10:46:56 PM UTC+1, mmarco wrote:
The result of the compilation is relocatable? I mean, would it be
eventually possible to have something that windows users just unzip and
runs? Or would they always need to compile it?
I would say so, i dont really know if any
And I forgot http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17365 and
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15649 which need a little love (and as it
only affects Cygwin should be easy to review, at least if you trust me)!!!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-devel
Yooo !
I think we can discuss code and ideas without being rude. If I receive a
rude comment, I have neither the energy nor the time to find the ideas in
it, and I shouldn't have to do it (and neither should you).
Well, rudeness happen because of misunderstandings. Of course we can
discuss
Le jeudi 27 novembre 2014 14:50:06 UTC+1, Simon King a écrit :
Hi Volker,
On 2014-11-27, Volker Braun vbrau...@gmail.com javascript: wrote:
But we do communicate in English, so we can't really avoid using
anglosaxon
organizational concepts.
I refuse the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:20:42 PM UTC, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
Alternative : make the majestuous Latin of Leonard Euler the lingua franca
of sage- lists/groups. That would give us the added benefit of having
grammatically well-built posts much more frequently...
Quick, lets
Lectoribus salutem!
Emmanuel Charpentier scripsit:
Alternative : make the majestuous Latin of Leonard Euler the lingua franca
of sage- lists/groups. That would give us the added benefit of having
grammatically well-built posts much more frequently...
Haec propositio approbationem meam
One of the most important differences between Sage and Mathematica, is that
no one of the developers has such a big ego than Stephen Wolfram. It even
got it's own music theme: https://mollyrocket.com/11235
And we all know that Python will never decipher the universe like the
Wolfram language
7 Frimaire an 223 de la Révolution die, scribit Volker Braun :
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:20:42 PM UTC, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
Alternative : make the majestuous Latin of Leonard Euler the lingua
franca of sage- lists/groups. That would give us the added benefit of
having
die XXVII mensis Novembris anni MMDCCLXVII ab urbe condita Emmanuel
Charpentier scripsit:
7 Frimaire an 223 de la Révolution die, scribit Volker Braun :
On Thursday, November 27, 2014 7:20:42 PM UTC, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
Alternative : make the majestuous Latin of Leonard Euler the
2014-11-27 18:41 GMT+01:00 Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com:
Yooo !
I think we can discuss code and ideas without being rude. If I receive a
rude comment, I have neither the energy nor the time to find the ideas in
it, and I shouldn't have to do it (and neither should you).
Well,
Hi Viviane,
On 2014-11-27, Viviane Pons vivianep...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we can discuss code and ideas without being rude. If I receive a
rude comment, I have neither the energy nor the time to find the ideas in
it, and I shouldn't have to do it (and neither should you).
Why not? I didn't
I think we can discuss code and ideas without being rude. If I receive a
rude comment, I have neither the energy nor the time to find the ideas in
it, and I shouldn't have to do it (and neither should you).
+1
A.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
38 matches
Mail list logo
