Hi,
SAGE-2.7.3 is out, released from Thai City in Palo Alto!
Some changes include:
Thu Aug 2 14:44:12 2007
2.7.3:
* r bradshaw: bug fixes
* j bober: vastly optimized number_of_partitions
* c citro: bug fixes and optimization of computing eisenstein
On 8/2/07, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That certainly isn't likely to happen for the uses of sage_c_lib so far. Most
> of it is pretty random bizarre stuff that was difficult from pyrex for some
> reason (C++ wrappers and other such stuff).
>
> I think this is quite reasonable to
On Thursday 02 August 2007 20:02, didier deshommes wrote:
> 2007/8/2, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> should be a subdirectory of SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/, and
>
> > SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/spkg-install should install both, and
> > setup.py should be extended to build the c_lib if it changes.
> >
On Aug 3, 1:27 am, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Clement,
>
> Any chance you could look into this. It's an 8x8 full matrix where
> linbox (via SAGE)
> computes the wrong determinant?
>
> Here's the SAGE session that gives the bad result:
>
> sage: M = matrix(
> [
> [-382125766
Hi there,
I have uploaded a candidate spkg for Singular 3-0-3 to
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/pkgs/singular-3-0-3-20070802.spkg
For me (Debian Etch/Sid, AMD64, Core2Duo) it installs fine. You will need to
apply the attached patch (5535.patch) and 'sage -ba' before ru
2007/8/2, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
should be a subdirectory of SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/, and
> SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/spkg-install should install both, and
> setup.py should be extended to build the c_lib if it changes.
> Moreover, spkg-dist in SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage should of course
> package
Hi Clement,
Any chance you could look into this. It's an 8x8 full matrix where
linbox (via SAGE)
computes the wrong determinant?
Here's the SAGE session that gives the bad result:
sage: M = matrix(
[
[-3821257660, -3821257669, -1736935303, -2779096486, -1736935306,
-2779096486, -2779096489, -2
On 8/2/07, Clement Pernet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As for Linbox and g++-4.2, we finally managed to take a design decision
> today (after ISSAC conference). I have just patched the code, and also
> givaro as well, and the svn will be updated tonight or tomorow morning,
> as soon as all compila
-- Forwarded message --
From: William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Aug 2, 2007 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: sage_c_lib patch
To: David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joel B. Mohler"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Martin Albrecht
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Joel and Martin,
David Harvey, Craig Citro, and
On 8/2/07, Alec Mihailovs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Singular 3.03 was included in Cygwin today. Are there plans to include it in
> SAGE?
Martin Albrecht (a SAGE developer) is working on this even as we "speak".
Packaging Singular for SAGE is quite nontrivial.
> An interesting thing is that no
jsMath3.4c is available,
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=172663
while SAGE is using 3.3 version, I think.
By the way, I put Tex-fonts from
http://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/download/jsMath-fonts.html and
http://www.math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath/download/extra-fonts/we
Singular 3.03 was included in Cygwin today. Are there plans to include it in
SAGE? An interesting thing is that now it can be built as a library.
Alec
- Original Message -
From: "Oliver Wienand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:07 AM
Subjec
> Right now I've got 19 MB of snapshots for just 9 small worksheets! That
> seems to be about 2 orders of magnitude more than I would want. For
> example, for worksheet 2 the file worksheet.txt is only 32kB, but the
> snapshots directory is 5.6MB with 1400 backups!
I keep my VMWare images, and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>> Do old snapshots get deleted automatically?
>>
>> Not implemented yet, but definitely planned. Any suggestions for
>> the default old-delete policy?
>
> Logarithmic-ish. Keep 1 a minute for 10 minutes, 1 every 10 minutes for 100
> minutes...
Something like that s
That's interesting. I haven't done any speed comparisons. But it seems
impossible that a carefully coded fixed-precision library should not
be faster than a multi-precision library.
Did you use double-doubles when you got below 106 bits?
I *have* made the assumption here that these guys know how
On 8/2/07, Alec Mihailovs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It uses long doubles now when then precision is small enough (and then,
> > later, just doubles like before), and the speedup is significant.
>
> By the way, I just installed SAGE 2.7.2 (from source) on my Ubuntu 7.04
> system, with AMD Athlo
From: "Jonathan Bober" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Incidentally, I should have mentioned here that I submitted a patch for
> version .4, and also updated it at
>
> http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~bober/partitions_c.cc
>
> It uses long doubles now when then precision is small enough (and then,
> later,
17 matches
Mail list logo
