On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > On 2 April 2015 at 17:31, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On 31 March 2015 at 15:18, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > <SNIP> >> >> >> >> >> >> All that said, Julia seems really exciting. If people write major >> >> packages of functionality in Julia that people doing mathematics >> >> really need, and is better than what is already in Sage, we could >> >> consider adding Julia to Sage... So far, the demand-from-end-users >> >> scale hasn't tipped in that direction. >> > >> > >> > We are already writing new sparse linear algebra and class group >> > computation >> > code in Julia. >> > >> > Much of it is still slower than Magma, due to various things we are >> > missing. >> > But some parts are already orders (plural) of magnitude faster than >> > Magma/Pari. >> >> Can you provide some links so that people reading these threads can >> easily try out and or look at what you're working on? Thanks. I just >> got excited by everything you wrote below, and thought "heh, I want to >> fire up Julia and try this out...! but I have to give a talk this >> morning so I only have a few moments to spare..." I realize you've >> posted or sent me a link or something before, but it'll take me 5+ >> minutes just to find it, and it might be out of date. (And of course, >> thanks for posting.) > > > The link you have is indeed out of date. > > I'm currently working on a massive rewrite and it is not really in a state > for other people to use at present. As I mentioned, you have to have the > latest development versions of Julia, LLVM, etc, which are all > intermittently hard to compile. (In fact, just yesterday, someone told me > the latest Julia nightly build completely breaks our code.) > > Moreover, the new class group stuff I mentioned is not merged yet. I've been > on holidays for over a month with hardly working internet access, so have > had no time to clean up/merge the contributions written whilst I was away. > Claus Fieker and Tommy Hoffman have been working on it. It's likely to be > some time before our implementation is overall competitive with anything! > > But you can get a view of the (largely broken) code that is committed, > excluding the class group and sparse linear algebra stuff, as it currently > stands, here: > > https://github.com/wbhart/Nemo.jl/tree/rewrite > > Note the test suite does not pass and the documentation is completely > incorrect and out-of-date. The Pari stack overflows if it wants to. There is > no attempt to intercept the signal handlers, so Pari currently does that if > something crashes. Lots and lots of issues, definitely not usable by an end > user in the current state. > > Also, none of the stuff we've been working on to get Singular and Factory > into Nemo is currently in a state to be committed anywhere. And it relies on > Cxx, which is a (brilliant) experimental Julia package which currently takes > significant effort to compile. I don't expect that to be stable enough for > serious use for 6-12 months. It's absolutely brand new technology, developed > by one of the core Julia developers. > > As soon as I have completed the current rewrite of Nemo, I'll make an > announcement. Assuming we are happy with the state of things at that point, > and Julia/LLVM have stabilised, I'll let people know how they can make use > of and possibly contribute to it. > > As I mentioned, there remain quite a few design decisions and technical > obstacles. The only thing I can say is that the remaining issues are > resolving themselves sufficiently fast that we can be sure of something that > works in a reasonable period of time. At least LLVM-3.6 has just been > released, which is a major milestone for stability that we have been waiting > for. > > We are very deliberately targeting the leading/bleeding edge because there > is just so much amazing, useful stuff in the works that we really can't > ignore (dramatically improved gc, much better C struct support, staged > functions, C++ interface support, including inline C++, many speedups and > bug fixes). We have numerous local hacks so that we can keep working through > all the chaos. > > Our plans extend as much as 13 years into the future at present. So it's > very early days.
All I've got to say is: - STRONG ENCOURAGEMENT - I'm really glad you guys are working on this! - Many thanks for sharing and the status report. William > > Bill. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-flame" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-flame+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sage-fl...@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-flame. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- William (http://wstein.org) -- 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
