[sage-support] Re: A nice (minor ?) bug ?

Never ming : this has been reported six months ago… Sorry for the noise… ​ Le vendredi 22 décembre 2023 à 06:51:59 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > Seen in 10.3.beta3 : > sage: show_identifiers() :1: > DeprecationWarning: Importing

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 2:42:26 PM UTC, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > It might not be necessary to (re)assign the global variable. Only if the > user wants to do operations with the polynomial he wants an x to be that > poly variable, and certainly not another x. So, the parser can do the

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 8:00:34 AM UTC, Simon King wrote: > > So, we have two x with different roles. It would make sense to disallow > the creation of such rings. > > -1. It would mean any structure with named generators would have to go dig into the tower that defines it base to

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

Sorry for the noise, it already works fine, just not with characteristic polynomials of symbolic matrices. They messed up my Sage session, so the minpoly example seemed to fail too. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

It might not be necessary to (re)assign the global variable. Only if the user wants to do operations with the polynomial he wants an x to be that poly variable, and certainly not another x. So, the parser can do the part of figuring out what x is meant, maybe by checking all generator names.

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On 28 February 2018 at 13:49, Ralf Stephan wrote: > Why should I define x when Sage gives me a polynomial with x, doesn't it > already know it? > > That's what a user would ask and, frankly, s/he would be right. > Here is one reason. In this example: sage:

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

Why should I define x when Sage gives me a polynomial with x, doesn't it already know it? That's what a user would ask and, frankly, s/he would be right. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On 2018-02-28, Ralf Stephan wrote: > On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 9:09:04 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> I would be for dropping 'x' as the only "default" variable (defined at >> start time). >> > > I agree but does it solve the problem I demonstrated. Can you

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at 9:09:04 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > I would be for dropping 'x' as the only "default" variable (defined at > start time). > I agree but does it solve the problem I demonstrated. Can you then add x to the minpoly? -- You received this message because

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

I would be for dropping 'x' as the only "default" variable (defined at start time). Sage is unique in this sense AFAIK; there are CASes which don't require declaration of any variable, there are ones that don't have any special variables like Sage's 'x'. On Wednesday, February 28, 2018 at

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

Hi Ralf, On 2018-02-28, Ralf Stephan wrote: > The reason is apparently that the polynomial ring was not created by the > user on the command line but by the charpoly() code. The parent of the pre-defined variable x wasn't created by the user either, so, please don't blame

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 10:58:38 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > This is now https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24853 > While that fixes the infinite loop, it only works around another issue that is uncovered, namely that the x in the polynomial returned by charpoly() is not

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

Thanks! Juan Luis Varona -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

This is now https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24853 On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 9:47:55 AM UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 1:52:20 AM UTC, Juan Luis Varona wrote: >> >> In sagemath 7.5, we can use this code: >> >> t=var('t'); >>

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 1:52:20 AM UTC, Juan Luis Varona wrote: > > In sagemath 7.5, we can use this code: > > t=var('t'); > M=matrix(4,[[0,0,5/4,2],[t,0,0,0],[0,1,0,0],[0,0,1,0]]); > P=charpoly(M); > P.substitute(x=1) > > Then, we get the correct answer > -13/4*t +

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in the FreeAlgebra Class?

Can you explain how i run the updated version? I'm still a bit of a novice, and right now i'm currently running SageMath cloud. Again, I thank you for your help! On Thursday, March 30, 2017 at 5:38:58 PM UTC-4, Simon King wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > On 2017-03-30, Adam Mullins

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in the FreeAlgebra Class?

Hi Adam, On 2017-03-30, Adam Mullins wrote: > Shouldn't 0 in R return true as well? Does it not?? That should certainly work with the fix from the ticket that I mentioned. Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in the FreeAlgebra Class?

Thank you so much for your speedy response and quick fix! I can't thank you enough! On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 10:17:10 AM UTC-4, Simon King wrote: > > Hi! > > Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2017 14:14:28 UTC+2 schrieb Simon King: >> >> I will open a trac ticket for it. >> > > I opened

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in the FreeAlgebra Class?

Thank you so much for your speedy response and quick fix! I can't thank you enough, really! On Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:08:12 PM UTC-4, Adam Mullins wrote: > > Hi, I create a free algebra like such: > > R. = FreeAlgebra(Integers(2)) > > When I try to check if the constant

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in the FreeAlgebra Class?

Hi! Am Mittwoch, 29. März 2017 14:14:28 UTC+2 schrieb Simon King: > > I will open a trac ticket for it. > I opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22707. With the branch from there (that hasn't been tested yet, so, handle with care!), one has sage: R. = FreeAlgebra(Integers(2)) sage:

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in the FreeAlgebra Class?

Hi! On 2017-03-28, Adam Mullins wrote: > Hi, I create a free algebra like such: > > R. = FreeAlgebra(Integers(2)) > > When I try to check if the constant polynomial 1 is in R, it returns false. > But this should return true. > i.e. 1 in R returns false > > It

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in Polyhedron class (RDF vs AA)?

Hi, Thank you for your quick answer! Ok, that makes sense. I have a follow-up question. I will put it on sage-devel as it is related to the implementation of a ticket. Best, JP Le lundi 12 octobre 2015 22:21:12 UTC+2, vdelecroix a écrit : > > On 12/10/15 12:57, Nathann Cohen wrote: > >>

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in Polyhedron class (RDF vs AA)?

Hellooo, Is the following behavior normal: > Well... In the first case you work on an exact ring, and in the second case you compare the output of >= and > on an inexact ring. I do not know if there is something wrong somewhere, but I do not expect float computations to be exact either,

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug in Polyhedron class (RDF vs AA)?

On 12/10/15 12:57, Nathann Cohen wrote: Is the following behavior normal: Well... In the first case you work on an exact ring, and in the second case you compare the output of >= and > on an inexact ring. I do not know if there is something wrong somewhere, but I do not expect float

[sage-support] Re: Simplex not simplicial / bug in polyhedra code?

Hi, On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 7:29:56 PM UTC+2, Volker Braun wrote: Your simplex is not a full-dimensional simplex, so its a bit of a question of definition. I see. For me the question whether a polytope is simplicial is independent of the embedding, but any choice is fine as long

[sage-support] Re: Simplex not simplicial / bug in polyhedra code?

Your simplex is not a full-dimensional simplex, so its a bit of a question of definition. We could a) keep the False output but fix the docstring of is_simplicial to require full dimensionality, or b) extend simplicial-ness to general polyhedra. Then they obviously aren't the duals of simple

[sage-support] Re: Possible Sqrt Simplification Bug

Hello, I believe I found a bug in how radicals are simplified. The general idea is that sqrt(x^2)=abs(x), but sage simplifies sqrt(x^2) to x instead, even if x is negative. I've included a simple example below. sage: x = var('x') sage: assume(x0) sage: expr = sqrt(x^2) sage:

[sage-support] Re: [sage-devel] A bug reporting on computation of Manin constant of an elliptic curve

It is because your first curve E1 is not a minimal model. Its label is still successfully given ('7161g1') but when you construct the curve from that label it gives you the minimal model. Compare discriminants: that of E1 is 2^12 times that of E2. I am copying to sage-support and sage-nt,

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

Pari's numerical integration does implement some very sophisticated algorithms, as implemented by Henri Cohen, who has given talks about how good they are but which stress how important it is to use the right variant, depending in the analytic properties of the function being integrated. If

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

f1(x)=1/sqrt(x^3+2) f2(x)=1/sqrt(x^4+2) r1=RR(integrate(f1(x),(x,1,10^(10 r2=RR(integrate(f2(x),(x,1,10^(10 s1=RR(integrate(f1(x),(x,1,10^(11 s2=RR(integrate(f2(x),(x,1,10^(11 Note that probably using something like sage: numerical_integral(f2,1,10^8)

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

On 2014-08-29, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote: sage: numerical_integral(f2,1,10^8) (0.8815690504421161, 3.309409685784312e-09) sage: numerical_integral(f2,1,10^9) (0.8815690594421439, 2.7280605832086615e-08) sage: numerical_integral(f2,1,10^10) (0.8815690603426408, 6.194229607849825e-07)

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

On Friday, August 29, 2014 7:15:27 PM UTC+2, Robert Dodier wrote: QUADPACK ... I've tried this in mpmath's quad. I think it works there, but maybe I've overlooked the actual problem. sage: import mpmath as mp sage: f1 = lambda _ : 1. / mp.sqrt(_^3 + 2) sage: f2 = lambda _ : 1. /

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

Sage punts numerical integrals to QUADPACK or a translation of it, What does GSL use? I forgot that Scipy also has quadrature, in addition to Maxima... wealth of riches. right? QUADPACK is based on Gauss-Kronrod rules which are essentially Gaussian integration + an efficient

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

On 2014-08-29, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote: sage: gp.eval('intnum(x=1,1000,1/sqrt(x^4+2))') '0.88156906043147435374520375967552406680' sage: gp.eval('intnum(x=1,1,1/sqrt(x^4+2))') '0.88156906044791138558085421922579474969' Hmm, what method does PARI/GP use? The

[sage-support] Re: apparent numerical integration bug in sage

Hello Robert, Hmm, what method does PARI/GP use? The documentation for intnum doesn't seem to mention any algorithms. ... I just looked at the source code (intnum.c) and I can't tell what's going on. There is some code for Romberg's method (intnumromb) but it's not called from intnum

[sage-support] Re: Taylor Polynomial possible bug in return

Little more: I see canterbury is using 4.8. Maybe this is fixed in version 5? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups sage-support group. To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

[sage-support] Re: randint - Maybe one bug !

On 09/19/2012 07:23 PM, Christophe BAL wrote: Hello, you're right my example is too long. Here is a better example where you can see that the use of ``1*randint(-20, 20)`` instead of ``randint(-20, 20)`` will produce fractions instead of integer divisisons. I really think that this is

Re: [sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Victor Miller victorsmil...@gmail.com wrote: Good news (so far) -- I tracked down the source of the bug.  I had a long calculation (the details of which are irrelevant) which produced a pair of points on an elliptic curve, say P1 and P2, over a finite field of

[sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

I'll see what I can do about getting that. To give a little more detail, I then wrote the following function: def manydouble(P,n): for _ in range(n): P = 2*P return P and changed the statement if Q1 = 2**(1+len(z))*P1: print Hooray to if Q = manydouble(P1,1+len(z)):

[sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

There's a real bug in Cython. It looks like it's some sort of parsing bug. Consider the following program: def Check(P,x): Q = 2**(1+len(x))*P R = P for _ in range(1+len(x)): R = 2*R if Q != R: print Check: Got it!, Q=,Q, R=,R else: print Ok def

Re: [sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Victor Miller victorsmil...@gmail.com wrote: There's a real bug in Cython.  It looks like it's some sort of parsing bug. Consider the following program: def Check(P,x):     Q = 2**(1+len(x))*P     R = P     for _ in range(1+len(x)):     R = 2*R     if

[sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

My vote is for an Overflow exception. Certainly doing nothing is not good. Victor On Aug 4, 3:05 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Victor Miller victorsmil...@gmail.com wrote: There's a real bug in Cython.  It looks like it's some sort

Re: [sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

This is exactly the kind if thing we try to avoid. I'd like to see the files (if they're disclosable of course), or perhaps you could come up with a whittled-down example. On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 7:22 PM, VictorMiller victorsmil...@gmail.com wrote: Robert, The .py and .pyx files are identical.  I

[sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

Robert, I'll see what I can do. As you suspected, the files are not disclosable :-(. Victor On Aug 3, 3:03 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: This is exactly the kind if thing we try to avoid. I'd like to see the files (if they're disclosable of course), or perhaps you

[sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

Good news (so far) -- I tracked down the source of the bug. I had a long calculation (the details of which are irrelevant) which produced a pair of points on an elliptic curve, say P1 and P2, over a finite field of the form GF(2^n). In order to check the calculation I needed to check Q1 ==

[sage-support] Re: Tracking down a bug(?) in Cython

Robert, The .py and .pyx files are identical. I copied one to the other, and just in case I checked with diff. It's very puzzling. Victor On Aug 2, 8:19 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:29 AM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug

[sage-support] Re: abs(pi*i) Bug

I've just compiled on my laptotp the last maxima version, (%i13) abs(%pi*%i); (%o13)%pi Seems it works On which Maxima version is based Sage 4.6.1? On 8 fév, 06:04, Robert Dodier robert.dod...@gmail.com wrote: On Feb 7, 5:05 am, Clemens Heuberger

[sage-support] Re: abs(pi*i) Bug

Sage implements... maxima.version() 5.22.1 On 8 fév, 15:52, Loïc xl...@free.fr wrote: I've just compiled on my laptotp the last maxima version, (%i13) abs(%pi*%i); (%o13)                                %pi Seems it works On which Maxima version is based Sage 4.6.1? On 8 fév, 06:04,

[sage-support] Re: abs(pi*i) Bug

On Feb 7, 5:05 am, Clemens Heuberger clemens.heuber...@gmail.com wrote: I encountered the following bug: sage: abs(pi*I) I*pi The correct answer would have been pi. Several other examples show a different behaviour, e.g. sage: abs(log(2)*I) abs(I*log(2)) Here, the answer is correct

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9945 needs review. On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: Oops. I'll post a fix. On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:42 PM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 17, 2:30 pm, Alex Lara lrodr...@gmail.com

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

On Sep 17, 2:30 pm, Alex Lara lrodr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone In Sage 4.5.2 and Sage 4.5.3, I get the following error using partial_fraction_decomposition() sage: R.x = GF(3)[] sage: q = (x+1)/(x^3+x+1) If you try sage: q.part[tab] you'll see that this isn't a method for this

Re: [sage-support] Re: Is this a bug?

Oops. I'll post a fix. On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:42 PM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 17, 2:30 pm, Alex Lara lrodr...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone In Sage 4.5.2 and Sage 4.5.3, I get the following error using partial_fraction_decomposition() sage: R.x = GF(3)[] sage: q =

[sage-support] Re: Piecewise Function gotcha - bug or feature?

On Oct 15, 4:12 pm, erikson1970 leifhi...@gmail.com wrote: Piecewise Function: endpoint gotcha - bug or feature? It seems that the piecewise function (which requires overlapping endpoints for the specified function intervals) does some unadvertised averaging for results for values at the

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Minh, Tutorials, tips and techniques on making and managing patches should go in the Developers' Guide at http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/ Aha! This already has the stuff I was going to write up. The reason that I never looked at this is that I do not consider myself a developer. I

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Hi Mariah, On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Mariah mariah.le...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP I respectfully suggest that this section be split out to a How to make a Sage patch (for newbies) ... or at the very least moved to the beginning of the Developers' Guide. This is now ticket #6987

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Dan, As you suggested, I took a look at the Mercurial website and quickly found that putting the following in my .hgrc file would make hg use my email address rather than 'mar...@localhost.localdomain' [ui] username = Mariah Lenox mariah.le...@gmail.com You sound like you're pretty

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Hi Mariah, On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Mariah mariah.le...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP Is there a How to make a Sage patch (for newbies) page anywhere? If not, there should be. The sage-combinat team has a wiki page on using Mercurial for making patches:

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

William, The file misc.py has this line: sxrange = xsrange Ah, yes. I should have looked at the source code. Apologies. Any chance you could post a patch with a statement that they are aliases added to the docs? How about:

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Second attempt. Embarrassing typo in my first attempt. - --- misc.py.orig        2009-09-15 16:25:22.983553000 -0400 +++ misc.py     2009-09-15 16:28:47.335875000 -0400 @@ -1001,8 +1001,8 @@      ..

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Hi Mariah, On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Mariah mariah.le...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP What I do not know how to do is to indicate that this is for the file sage-4.1.1/sage/misc/misc.py in spkg/standard/sage-4.1.1.spkg Is there a convention as to how to indicate this? Do you mean

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Minh, Ok, how does the following look? Like what you want? The date looks funny. # HG changeset patch # User mariah.le...@gmail.com # Date 1253110290 14400 # Node ID 299c98688ef9ab55662e33f9b9e074de803de4c4 # Parent

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

On Sep 16, 2009, at 7:22 AM, Mariah wrote: Minh, Ok, how does the following look? Like what you want? The date looks funny. # HG changeset patch # User mariah.le...@gmail.com # Date 1253110290 14400 # Node ID

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

Hi Mariah, On 16 Sep., 15:29, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote: [...] Do you mean producing a proper patch file using Mercurial? If yes, then you can use the Mercurial that's shipped with Sage like so. From SAGE_ROOT, you can do something along the lines of the following terminal

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 at 07:22AM -0700, Mariah wrote: Note that the first time I did $ hg ci I had to edit the file that my editor threw up to remove leading HG in some lines. When I repeat the command, I now get No username found, using 'mar...@localhost.localdomain' instead I also had to

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Mariah Lenox mariah.le...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I do not understand sxrange / xsrange correctly.  The reference manual entries for them seem to be similar.  Is there a difference?  (If one is just an alias for the other, it would be best to say so. If

[sage-support] Re: sxrange / xsrange possible bug

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Sep 15, 2009, at 11:28 AM, William Stein wrote: You might have some thought about this... at least I think it might be caused by your optimizations to [a..b].  This is really a question from ccr, by the

[sage-support] Re: Is this a bug to everyone else?

I get sage: var('x') x sage: f = sin(x)/x sage: g = f.integrate(x) sage: g integrate(sin(x)/x, x) in 3.2.1.rc1. Personally, I would call this a missing feature, not a bug. Interestingly, it can compute sage: f.integrate(x,0,infinity) pi/2 sage: f.integrate(x,-infinity,infinity) pi On Fri,

[sage-support] Re: bessel function problems/bug? [plots]

dt wrote: Hi All, I'm new to sage. I'm very impressed and a bit overwhelmed at the capabilities in sage. I noticed a discrepancy today that I can't reconcile in the response of bessel functions. I get different values depending on how I invoke it. For example, the bessel J functions

[sage-support] Re: bessel function problems/bug? [plots]

I see what you mean now. I think you have established that the maxima documentation http://maxima.sourceforge.net/docs/manual/en/maxima_16.html#SEC52 is wrong. I 've tested other J-Bessel values and some Y-Bessel values based on http://idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/idl_html_help/BESELJ.html The pari