Alternatively, one could try to see if https://github.com/container2wasm/container2wasm works to get a 64bit-based version.
On Saturday, February 14, 2026 at 7:09:54 PM UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: > This is cool! Thanks for your work. > > Just as shot in the dark: perhaps the 32-bit version of archlinux allows > to install all up-to-date sage dependencies. If that's the case, you could > just build sage using `pip install .`, which is then non-editable. > > @others: what do you think about adding this to the website as "Try > SageMath", so that potential users can see if they like sage enough to > install it on their PC? > > On Saturday, February 14, 2026 at 3:28:10 PM UTC+1 parisse wrote: > >> Thanks for the confirmation. >> It’s a fascinating technical milestone, but if we are looking to >> resources conservation, this is clearly not the right direction... >> >> On Saturday, February 14, 2026 at 1:36:39 PM UTC+1 [email protected] >> wrote: >> >>> SageMath-in-Browser is about 2 orders of magnitude slower than native >>> sage code. >>> I ran the following bench mark: >>> 'from sage.misc.benchmark import *' >>> '_ = benchmark()' >>> >>> Output of SageMath-in-Browser: >>> [image: benchmark.png] >>> Output of native sage: >>> [image: bench_native.png] >>> On Saturday, February 14, 2026 at 4:55:39 PM UTC+8 Georgi Guninski wrote: >>> >>>> > I don't know the expected performance penalty. >>>> >>>> To measure the time, create `file.sage` with fast code. >>>> In bash run: time sage file.sage # for native sage >>>> and: time emulated_sage file.sage #for JS sage >>>> >>>> To benchmark inside sage, one possibility is: >>>> sage: timeit("code") >>>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/5e5a1e86-71f8-42ee-9e4f-7f31097e0820n%40googlegroups.com.
