In response to Williams sage-2.0 plan I wanted to describe what I had done
with using gsl to implement a numerical ode solver. I believe that the
patch containing this will be applied after
doing a recent pull or upgrade but I'm not sure(is this true?). If not I
can send patches for people to pla
Hello William,
I did some research on pyrex and I am not very happy with the way I
have to handle polymorphisms (among other things). So I looked for
alternatives and found SIP and CXX among other things that are somewhat
more tailored toward C++. I am willing to believe you that pyrex is
more e
I'm confused by your approach. I think it would be better if the
document you make is separate from the sage reference manual. Just
start a new document and as you go through ref.tex looking for things
add sections to your new document. Don't mix them up together.
They will be separate docum
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 13:21:47 -0800, Iftikhar Burhanuddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Iftikhar Burhanuddin wrote:
* As I prepare for SD2.5
http://sage.math.washington.edu/msri07/
(http://modular.math.washington.edu/ seems to be down)
I will be enhancing some sections of d
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Iftikhar Burhanuddin wrote:
* As I prepare for SD2.5
http://sage.math.washington.edu/msri07/
(http://modular.math.washington.edu/ seems to be down)
I will be enhancing some sections of devel/doc/ref/ref.tex.
Specifically, I'm eyeballing the SAGE source code (with the inte
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, William Stein wrote:
== Documentation ==
* First steps Documentation: A 15-page introduction, like Magma's "First
Steps" guide.
-- David Joyner (??)
* The programming guide: needs lots of work
-- Ifti B., William Stein (??)
-- Jaap Spies
*
On Jan 3, 2007, at 3:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
What's the status with multi-modular methods? I was thinking of
starting on this, but wasn't sure if you had done anything.
I haven't done anything beyond what's in the current release.
One thing for you to do is to fix the asymptotically fas
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:57:45 -0800, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
William Stein wrote:
Here is an updated version of the sage-2.0 list, with some preliminary
people
assignments:
How about the start of the Sloane Project: Providing a class of sequences
from the OEIS (online encyclop
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:48:21 -0800, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jan 3, 2007, at 11:21 AM, William Stein wrote:
== Optimization ==
* Optimize matrices: In the file matrix/docs.py is a list of base
rings where specialized matrix classes should be implemented.
More spec
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:46:52 -0800, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
An initial sage-2.0 roadmap had fraction field elements going to SageX. Is
this being pushed to the future? It's fine if it is. I just noticed that
they have some rather embarassing performance characteristics (wh
On Jan 3, 2007, at 3:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I'll do (b)
- Robert
Dude you absolutely ROCK!
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jan 3, 2007, at 12:00 PM, David Harvey wrote:
On Jan 3, 2007, at 1:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
* Implement in SageX the following ring elements:
* CC -- arbitrary precision complex numbers
* IR -- interval arithmetic ring
* k[x] -- polynomial ring over arbitrary ring
* Fir
On Jan 3, 2007, at 1:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
* Implement in SageX the following ring elements:
* CC -- arbitrary precision complex numbers
* IR -- interval arithmetic ring
* k[x] -- polynomial ring over arbitrary ring
* First version of FLINT (Hart and Harvey's C library)
William Stein wrote:
Here is an updated version of the sage-2.0 list, with some preliminary
people
assignments:
How about the start of the Sloane Project: Providing a class of sequences
from the OEIS (online encyclopedia of integers sequences)?
Volonteers are ready to jump in.
Jaap
--~
On Jan 3, 2007, at 11:21 AM, William Stein wrote:
== Optimization ==
* Optimize matrices: In the file matrix/docs.py is a list of base
rings where specialized matrix classes should be implemented.
More specialized vector space and free module classes also need to
be implemented i
An initial sage-2.0 roadmap had fraction field elements going to SageX. Is
this being pushed to the future? It's fine if it is. I just noticed that
they have some rather embarassing performance characteristics (which had
nothing to do with python vs. sageX). I had considered taking that c
Oops (let me repeat and extend my last e-mail with the subject about "number
field conjugation patch" which really isn't the correct subject anyhow).
The patch is here for the complex field element pyrexification:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/jbmohler/patches/complex_number_pyrex.patch
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 12:34, William Stein wrote:
How is the complex number pyrexification going?
The patch is here (which I think I sent you before):
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/jbmohler/patches/complex_number_pyrex.patch
I spent a great deal of time making sure that the compl
Here is an updated version of the sage-2.0 list, with some preliminary people
assignments:
Hello,
I've updated the roadmap at
http://sage.math.washington.edu:9002/sage_trac/roadmap
to get us to sage-2.0 in a reasonable way. We have four weeks left
until I want to release sage-2.0.
Thes
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 19:04, William Stein wrote:
Hello,
I've updated the roadmap at
http://sage.math.washington.edu:9002/sage_trac/roadmap
to get us to sage-2.0 in a reasonable way. We have four weeks left
until I want to release sage-2.0.
These are the main non-optional task
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 10:52:07 -0800, Hamptonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would be interested in helping with "Kantor's ODE solver" , although
I don't know what that is. I have a long-term goal of replacing
Mathematica with SAGE for our department's ODE and Calc III labs, but I
don't think the
Hi,
I would be interested in helping with "Kantor's ODE solver" , although
I don't know what that is. I have a long-term goal of replacing
Mathematica with SAGE for our department's ODE and Calc III labs, but I
don't think the time is right yet.
-Marshall Hampton
University of Minnesota, Dulut
Hello,
I've updated the roadmap at
http://sage.math.washington.edu:9002/sage_trac/roadmap
to get us to sage-2.0 in a reasonable way. We have four weeks left
until I want to release sage-2.0.
These are the main non-optional tasks listed there. Can anyone volunteer
to help on any of these
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 14:45:38 -0800, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 18 December 2006 15:29, William Stein wrote:
> On a slightly different note. I've wanted the cyclotomic fields to have
> a conjugate method already. It would replace the generator, zeta_n with
> (zeta_n)^(
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 08:44:07 -0800, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
it took a while for the 8.2GB, but the SAGE mirror at
cocoa.mathematik.uni-dortmund.de/sage/
is now online. I haven't looked to closely if everything works, but on
"sage/download.html" the link for "Live CD: ISO and VMwa
Hello,
it took a while for the 8.2GB, but the SAGE mirror at
cocoa.mathematik.uni-dortmund.de/sage/
is now online. I haven't looked to closely if everything works, but on
"sage/download.html" the link for "Live CD: ISO and VMware image"
should point to sage.math since we don't mirror the /sag
--- Forwarded message ---
From: "Bruno Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Sage
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 07:32:18 -0800
Dear Sir,
I just noticed that you're using Maxima in Python by a kind of virtual
terminal, and I suppose that's why you need Expect in the p
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 02:44:27 -0800, David R. Kohel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi William,
Should I already have switched to sage.math.washington.edu or was modular
changed due to the downtime? Following David J's original rsync advince,
I was rsyncing vs. modular.math.washington.edu rather th
28 matches
Mail list logo
