On Jun 12, 2007, at 11:31 AM, Michel wrote:
> Ideally I should be the element x in ZZ[x]/(x^2+1) (and not QQ[x]/
> (x^2+1)).
I agree, but currently we have much better support for number fields
than orders or quotient rings. Hopefully that'll change (r.e. David
Roe's SEP).
> Likewise zeta[n
Ideally I should be the element x in ZZ[x]/(x^2+1) (and not QQ[x]/
(x^2+1)).
Likewise zeta[n] could be the element y in ZZ[y]/(y^n-1).
These rings should have automatic coercions to many other rings
(including
of course the symbolic ring).
Michel
On Jun 12, 8:04 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PR
On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:21 AM, Nick Alexander wrote:
> "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On 6/12/07, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or
>>> perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a
>
On Jun 12, 2007, at 11:17 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
>> I agree. I really like v1 but with the ???/verbose box deleted.
>
> Fixed. Same file.
I like it. Count me in for 1 shirt, size large...how much for S+H,
since I'm not in the neighborhood?
Justin
--
Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-L
"William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/12/07, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or
>> perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a
>> fixed embedding into C). It would be coerced into C, the
> I agree. I really like v1 but with the ???/verbose box deleted.
Fixed. Same file.
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99
_www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb
_jab: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--~--~-~--~~
On 6/12/07, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/12/07, Craig Citro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hey all,
> >
> > so here are three ideas for the sd4 shirt, called flier.pdf,
> > flier_plain.pdf, and flier2.pdf in:
> >
> > http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/citro/sd4_shirt/
> >
> > T
On 6/12/07, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or
> perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a
> fixed embedding into C). It would be coerced into C, the symbolic
> ring, etc. as needed.
With the curren
On 6/12/07, Liran Orevi <\> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 1)I've wanted to write this on Sage-Trac but have no user.
>
> 2)Sage crashes on:
>
> sage: for i in range(1,6,0.2):
> ... print i
>
> Wheras in phyton:
>
> >>>for i in range(3,7,0.2):
> ... a=5
> ...
> __main__:1: DeprecationWarning: integer
On 6/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The field of question marks kinda bugs me. With a label of "verbose", it
> looks like there's a bunch of unknowns / unintelligable responses...
>
I agree. I really like v1 but with the ???/verbose box deleted.
William
--~--~---
The field of question marks kinda bugs me. With a label of "verbose", it looks
like there's a bunch of unknowns / unintelligable responses...
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>
> I really like the sparse layout too. If we only have one side, how
> about something like this
>
> http
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 12:03, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> I like v1 better. My only thoughts are that the firefox logo looks to
> "empty" at the bottom, and I like the slightly rounded corners on the
> SAGE logo.
I have updated the v1 design based on your suggestions.
Martin
--
name: Martin Albr
On 6/12/07, Craig Citro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hey all,
>
> so here are three ideas for the sd4 shirt, called flier.pdf,
> flier_plain.pdf, and flier2.pdf in:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/citro/sd4_shirt/
>
> They're all basic variations on the sagemath.org flier, with the key
>
I like v1 better. My only thoughts are that the firefox logo looks to
"empty" at the bottom, and I like the slightly rounded corners on the
SAGE logo.
- Robert
On Jun 12, 2007, at 2:58 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 12 June 2007 07:00, Craig Citro wrote:
>> No, his is grayscale.
On Tuesday 12 June 2007 07:00, Craig Citro wrote:
> No, his is grayscale. We can't have any shades of gray (man, there are so
> many good jokes here) -- just black pixels & white pixels. For instance,
> his "unified," "python," and "web-aware" are all grayscale. I've been
> playing with cleaning u
I think the default I should belong to the number field Q[I] (or
perhaps even the ring of integers) to start with (together with a
fixed embedding into C). It would be coerced into C, the symbolic
ring, etc. as needed.
This doesn't resolve your second issue though, I think William's
simpi
I really like the sparse layout too. If we only have one side, how
about something like this
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/sd4-shirt/(just a
mockup based on Martin's stuff). Who has the "original" infinity-sage
logo? I'm sure that would go fine black and white. I put a BW ve
For those of you interested in improving number fields in Sage (especially
those of you who won't be at SD4), I've posted a SEP on the wiki. As you
will be able to tell, I was rushed at the end. But I would like to hear
peoples' comments.
http://www.sagemath.org:9001/days4/projects/numbertheory/
18 matches
Mail list logo
