alt-enter evaluates and doesn't make a cell. ctrl-shift-enter isn't bad. I've
been wanting a way to do that myself.
> ALT-ENTER or CTRL-SHIFT-ENTER seem logical if they aren't already used
> by something else.
>
>>
>>> I haven't been able to find a function for copying the whole worksheet,
>
I like that it says "control bar". My arrow doohickey wasn't very user
friendly.
I say the less clutter, the better. I'll have my changes ready by Monday (very
burnt out right now, or it'd be sooner). Most visible changes: splash page,
menu split. Less visible: smarter memory use, fewer bu
William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:16:03 -0800, Bill Hart
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > William, this is great. It is going to make things s much easier. I
> > love the notebook concept. It allows me to use all the other functions
> > of SAGE to test my own function (qsieve).
>
I think I found out why my C81 and C85 factorizations failed
yesterday.
I just ran a C81 again today via the new notebook interface and noticed
that when it got to about 8000 relations (about 15 minutes later), the
log file was inaccessible. It complained that q was not defined.
I tried running
> Note -- there's a new potentially controversial change!
> Now by default the left control pane (with the worksheet list,
> etc.,) is *off*. To see it click on "Control Bar" in the upper
> left of the screen. What do you think?
>
controversial, but William added that, not me :)
I like the Note
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 22:16:03 -0800, Bill Hart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> William, this is great. It is going to make things s much easier. I
> love the notebook concept. It allows me to use all the other functions
> of SAGE to test my own function (qsieve).
Cool.
> By the way, I'm still
Hi,
I've merged in all of Alex's latest code, which has some new
styling to the notebook, etc., and it is running at:
http://sage.math.washington.edu:8101/
Note -- there's a new potentially controversial change!
Now by default the left control pane (with the worksheet list,
etc.,) is *off*. To
William, this is great. It is going to make things s much easier. I
love the notebook concept. It allows me to use all the other functions
of SAGE to test my own function (qsieve).
By the way, I'm still having some troubles with the notebook interface.
In Opera, deleting workbooks still doesn
cool
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, William Stein wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I implemented traceback hiding for the notebook.
> Try it by making a mistake at:
>
> http://modular.math.washington.edu:8101/
>
> What do you think?
>
> William
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To po
Hi,
I implemented traceback hiding for the notebook.
Try it by making a mistake at:
http://modular.math.washington.edu:8101/
What do you think?
William
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe fr
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:31:26 -0800, alex clemesha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Ok,
> After applying my bundle to my sage1.5-alpha5 install
> I have changed some more things
> (bug fixes from the move, and more misc improvements)
>
> So I will make a new bundle from all this,
> will this new bun
Hi Bill,
I made a new version of the Sieve package and interface, which is
installed here:
http://modular.math.washington.edu:8101/sieve
If you do qsieve(, verbose=True), at the end it will give all
the extra logging information.
If you do q = qsieve(..., block=False) , then at any point
--- Forwarded message ---
From: "John Voight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'William Stein'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Subject: RE: [sage-devel] SAGE Days n for n >= 4
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 09:05:42 -0800
Hi Will,
If you would like to apply to the IMA, I would suggest a "hot topics"
workshop
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 07:50:54 -0800, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Seems kind of slim but I don't know the requirements and format.
It's supposed to be very short -- 1-3 pages included references.
Much of the decision is based on letters of reco.
Thanks for your comments -- just in
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:04:47 -0800, Robert Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Can anyone tell me what the real difference is between hg_sage.record
> and hg_sage.commit?
>
There is no difference. From misc/hg.py:
def commit(self, files='', comment=None, options='', diff=True):
.
I gave up waiting for a C85 to factor. Something must be wrong as I
calculate it should finish in about 2.5 hours (or it will be about 90
minutes when I put the Lanczos code in). It was still going after
nearly 8 hours, so I killed it.
So it looks like it is only good up to about 81 digits at pre
1. I hope to be am IMA in April (if they fund me) and perhaps
can try to find out details then. This also seems like a nice central location.
2. I've filled out NSA conference grant applications before (one
which was funded) and one which was not. I would not want it here,
due to security hassles,
On Wednesday 29 November 2006 09:04, Robert Miller wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what the real difference is between hg_sage.record
> and hg_sage.commit?
There is none. They both are the same function i.e. record is an alias for
commit. This is because we used darcs before where the commit command
Can anyone tell me what the real difference is between hg_sage.record
and hg_sage.commit?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit
19 matches
Mail list logo
