Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread 'Martin R. Albrecht' via sage-devel
Hi Markus, Works without a hitch here (Debian/testing, Sage 8.4). I have been planning on doing this over the years but never got around to it, so really cool to see that you did. Nice work! Cheers, Martin Markus Wageringel writes: > Hi everyone. > > I created a Sage wrapper for the C

Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread parisse
Le jeudi 22 novembre 2018 10:11:39 UTC+1, Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx) a écrit : > > Hi, > > > It was on my todo list for a while too, since our implementations are very > slow. Here "very" means "prohibitively", since some systems can not be > solved with Sage in decent time (via

Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 9:43 AM parisse wrote: > > > > Le jeudi 22 novembre 2018 10:11:39 UTC+1, Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx) a > écrit : >> >> Hi, >> >> >> It was on my todo list for a while too, since our implementations are very >> slow. Here "very" means "prohibitively", since some systems

Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 10:36 AM mmarco wrote: > > I would be interested in that too, but that sounds like a complex task. I > think one or more GSoC projects could fit into that... and maybe also some > thematic Sage Days. It's not a GSoC project, as it's 1st of all redesigning the

[sage-devel] Re: Implementing rings of coordinates

2018-11-22 Thread Simon King
Dear Salvatore, On 2018-11-21, VulK wrote: > is there any reason why `MPolynomialRing_polydict` > hardcodes `MPolynomial_polydict` as its element class? I believe it shouldn't hard-code it. > I would have expected something like > > ``` > class MPolynomialRing_polydict(

Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread Friedrich Wiemer
Cool Markus, thanks a lot for sharing this! :) Am Donnerstag, 22. November 2018 10:11:39 UTC+1 schrieb Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx): > Unfortunately, the fact that is is neither free-software nor open-source > made it lower on my todo list. I wonder whether it could be possible to > kindly

Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread Thierry
Hi, On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 08:48:58AM +, 'Martin R. Albrecht' via sage-devel wrote: > Hi Markus, > > Works without a hitch here (Debian/testing, Sage 8.4). I have been planning > on doing this over the years but never got around to it, so really cool to > see that you did. Nice work! It

[sage-devel] Re: A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread parisse
Did you make some comparisons with Giac ? Some benchmarks from Roman Pearce and my own tests, about 2 years old. Roman used an Intel Core i5 4570 3.2 GHz with 8 GB DDR3-1600 running 64-bit Linux (4 cores, 4 threads, 6M cache, turbo 3.2 -> 3.6GHz). I also checked Giac on my Mac (Core i5 2.9Ghz,

Re: [sage-devel] A Sage interface for FGb (Gröbner bases)

2018-11-22 Thread mmarco
I would be interested in that too, but that sounds like a complex task. I think one or more GSoC projects could fit into that... and maybe also some thematic Sage Days. El jueves, 22 de noviembre de 2018, 11:28:32 (UTC+1), Dima Pasechnik escribió: > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 9:43 AM parisse >

[sage-devel] Re: Implementing rings of coordinates

2018-11-22 Thread Simon King
On 2018-11-22, Simon King wrote: > However, I believe it is bad usage to hard-code a certain class as > output of arithmetic errors. Oops. "errors" is an error, it should be "operations". -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Implementing rings of coordinates

2018-11-22 Thread VulK
Done: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26741 It appears that the change messes up with coercions. More details in the ticket description. S. * Simon King [2018-11-22 14:10:14]: On 2018-11-22, Simon King wrote: However, I believe it is bad usage to hard-code a certain class as output of

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Implementing rings of coordinates

2018-11-22 Thread VulK
After a more accurate inspection, it appears that MPolynomialRing_polydict is in quite a bad shape. First of all it redefines __call__ which, if I read [1] correctly, should not be done. Second, within the many cases in __call__ one can find: {{{ 510 elif isinstance(x, dict): 511

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Implementing rings of coordinates

2018-11-22 Thread Nils Bruin
Pay attention, though. There may be all kinds of guidelines about how to write sage code "appropriately", but in classes where performance is very important there may be shortcuts that violate the guidelines. That may very well be intentional. It may also be that it's legacy code and that

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Implementing rings of coordinates

2018-11-22 Thread VulK
You make a very good point, I'll try to be careful. I doubt this is a case of efficiency since now __call__ goes through redundant cases and even has an argument that is not used anywhere. Anyway I will cobble together something and we can do speed testing before merging. * Nils Bruin

[sage-devel] doctest quality and patchbots

2018-11-22 Thread 'Martin R' via sage-devel
Dear all, in ticket https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26586 I just learned: - The tests of individual functions within a single file are ALL executed in the same environment. - The tests of the individual functions within a single file are executed in random order. So I thought,

[sage-devel] Advice about grant funded software projects?

2018-11-22 Thread Robert Jacobson
I am the author of MathLine and FoxySheep. My motivations have been to ultimately improve Sage, in particular by improving the ability for Mathematica and Sage to communicate. I have been trying to strategize about how to move forward within an academic environment that doesn't recognize