On Oct 25, 2007, at 9:35 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> Yep, for n=2 and n=3 there isn't anything funny going on. Ironically
> valgrind pretty much reports the same amount of still reachable
> memory:
>
> ==17336== LEAK SUMMARY:
> ==17336==definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks.
> ==17336== possibl
On Oct 26, 5:18 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2007, at 7:46 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > On Oct 25, 9:34 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > Hi Robert,
>
> >> Try adding "--clean 2" to line 1008 of process_cython_file() in
> >> setup.py.
>
> > that d
On Oct 25, 2007, at 7:46 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> On Oct 25, 9:34 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>>
>> Try adding "--clean 2" to line 1008 of process_cython_file() in
>> setup.py.
>>
>
> that doesn't work yet, because the parsing of the command line doesn't
> seem to c
On Oct 25, 9:34 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:14 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > On Oct 25, 8:04 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:03 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> >>> On Oct 25, 11:25 am, mabshoff
> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED
No, it's not. I just wrote it up now as a proof-of-concept.
--Mike
On 10/25/07, didier deshommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2007/10/25, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > Is this function in sage? Where is it located?
> >
> > Which function?
>
> Sorry, the random_monomials() functio
2007/10/25, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Is this function in sage? Where is it located?
>
> Which function?
Sorry, the random_monomials() function.
>
> --Mike
>
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
> Is this function in sage? Where is it located?
Which function?
--Mike
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 this group at ht
2007/10/25, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Since integers are chosen uniformly, this would guarantee (?) that the
> > polynomial is generated uniformly. Only hitch is that I don't know if
> > there is such inttovec is in in SAGE yet. mhansen, any idea?
>
> Yes, this is pretty much what I'm
On Oct 25, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
> On Friday 26 October 2007, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> This is an interesting construction, but I am wondering if a uniform
>> distribution for all polynomials of specified degree < d, with a
>> specified number of terms, is the most natural one
> Since integers are chosen uniformly, this would guarantee (?) that the
> polynomial is generated uniformly. Only hitch is that I don't know if
> there is such inttovec is in in SAGE yet. mhansen, any idea?
Yes, this is pretty much what I'm doing. While I don't have those
exact functions, they
2007/10/25, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> This construction is random if the random number generator ("randint") is
> random. Btw. how random is randint?
The core generator for all random functions in Python uses the
mersenne twister which is pretty strong.
I have another suggestion for
On Friday 26 October 2007, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> This is an interesting construction, but I am wondering if a uniform
> distribution for all polynomials of specified degree < d, with a
> specified number of terms, is the most natural one to give, and how
> grave the impact is on efficiency. (De
This is an interesting construction, but I am wondering if a uniform
distribution for all polynomials of specified degree < d, with a
specified number of terms, is the most natural one to give, and how
grave the impact is on efficiency. (Depending on the coefficient
ring, this goal may not
Hi,
after realizing that Steffen and I share an office at RHUL I discussed this
thing with him today for some time.
The improved implementation (#980) still doesn't produce random polynomials
for two reasons: The code does not seem to produce monomials of degree up to
$d$ uniformly at random.
On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:14 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> On Oct 25, 8:04 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:03 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 25, 11:25 am, mabshoff
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> dortmund.de> wrote:
On Oct 25, 9:06 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL
On Oct 25, 8:04 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:03 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 25, 11:25 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > dortmund.de> wrote:
> >> On Oct 25, 9:06 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> Hi Robert,
>
> >>> See
On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:03 AM, mabshoff wrote:
> On Oct 25, 11:25 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> dortmund.de> wrote:
>> On Oct 25, 9:06 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>>> Seehttp://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/cython/Alltests
>>> pass with cleanu
On 10/25/07, Robert Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had installed sage-2.8.8.1, and at some point I renamed the
> directory to just "sage". Then I upgraded to sage-2.8.9, and when
> trying to build, I get the following error. Can someone tell me where
> to change the pointer "sage-2.8.8.1" t
Hello all,
I had installed sage-2.8.8.1, and at some point I renamed the
directory to just "sage". Then I upgraded to sage-2.8.9, and when
trying to build, I get the following error. Can someone tell me where
to change the pointer "sage-2.8.8.1" to "sage", so I don't have to
reinstall everything?
On Oct 25, 11:25 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dortmund.de> wrote:
> On Oct 25, 9:06 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> > Seehttp://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/cython/Alltests
> > pass with cleanup level 1 (now default). The command line option
>
> >
On Oct 25, 9:14 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/25/07, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/25/07, Bill Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > For example, does the Lisp entry in
> > > mercurial-0.9.5 python=27386,sh=8300,tcl=3484,lisp=1411,ansic=1364
> > >make s
On Oct 25, 6:14 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/25/07, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
Hello,
>
>
>
> > On 10/25/07, Bill Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > There are some real surprises on that list. MPFR has many more lines
> > > of code than I thought,
On 10/25/07, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/25/07, Bill Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are some real surprises on that list. MPFR has many more lines
> > of code than I thought, Pari many fewer lines of code. It's amazing
> > what it achieves with such a small code b
On 10/25/07, Bill Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are some real surprises on that list. MPFR has many more lines
> of code than I thought, Pari many fewer lines of code. It's amazing
> what it achieves with such a small code base.
I think one should take everything in that table with a gr
On 10/25/07, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does the lucky bug reporter get a prize?
Of course. The person who reports bug 1000 gets a *free copy of Sage*!
-- William
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.
I was a little surprised by the number
lisp:340210 (6.96%)
For example, does the Lisp entry in
mercurial-0.9.5 python=27386,sh=8300,tcl=3484,lisp=1411,ansic=1364
make sense? As far as I know mercurial does not use any Lisp, or does it?
Regards,
Bill Page.
On 10/24/07, William Ste
There are some real surprises on that list. MPFR has many more lines
of code than I thought, Pari many fewer lines of code. It's amazing
what it achieves with such a small code base.
FLINT is a bloated pig compared to NTL, given what the two packages
actually do.
What's really amazing is that GM
On Oct 25, 2:48 pm, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does the lucky bug reporter get a prize?
He/she will be allowed to fix it ;) - if that isn't price enough I
don't know what would be *ducks*
Two more tickets :)
>
> david
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~-~--~~~---
Does the lucky bug reporter get a prize?
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 this group at http://groups.google.com/gr
On Oct 24, 7:00 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/24/07, Jaap Spies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > It is not in matrix2.pyx, It is on the bottom of my first message and here
> > below.
>
> > It uses some functions/methods present in matrix2.pyx:
> > rook_vector, perma
On Oct 25, 9:06 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi Robert,
> Seehttp://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/cython/All tests
> pass with cleanup level 1 (now default). The command line option
>
> --cleanup n
>
> sets the level (0 <= n <= 3). Things crash on quit (in SAGE, thou
Hello,
I've release sage-2.8.9.
Release team: Martin Albrecht (chair), William Stein, Carl Witty,
Michael Abshoff
Tickets Closed/Issues Resolved/Kittens Rescued:
===
758 Use NTL directly in Z/nZ polynomials robertwb
837 RealNumber should have abs method cwit
See http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/robertwb/cython/ All tests
pass with cleanup level 1 (now default). The command line option
--cleanup n
sets the level (0 <= n <= 3). Things crash on quit (in SAGE, though
not with simple examples) with level 3. This may or may not fix #557,
but is
33 matches
Mail list logo
