On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:24 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm just starting to write a book on Sage for an undergrad course.
> It's supposed
> to have a "narrative" and "personal" feel, much more so than the
> tutorial or other
> books. I guess it's a little like
Hi,
I'm just starting to write a book on Sage for an undergrad course.
It's supposed
to have a "narrative" and "personal" feel, much more so than the
tutorial or other
books. I guess it's a little like "Sage for newbies" except (1) aimed at senior
undergrads with a programming background, and (2
On Apr 3, 2008, at 11:22 AM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
>> I don't see the need, and I'm always leery of overpopulating the
>> namespace :-} You already have the functionality, and with '?',
>> it is
>> easily accessible.
>
> I don't always support synonyms but I do want all those little helper
>
Fine -- clearly a sensible choice at the time, and I would not dream
of changing that now!
John
On 03/04/2008, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 12:14 PM, John Cremona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > We have to regard 0 as a special case, I don't think th
OK, fine. In any case the fix was to make some changes to
sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_finite_field.py in code I wrote (and
I have added some doctests to match) rather than in the quadratic
order code which was fixed in #2653.
John
On 03/04/2008, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 12:14 PM, John Cremona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We have to regard 0 as a special case, I don't think there's any point
> in pretending otherwise. If all leading zeros were stripped off in
> all cases then the string representing 0 would be the empty string,
> and
On Apr 3, 9:20 pm, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The patch at #2653 whias was merged for 2.11 was supposed to fix this:
>
> {{{
> sage: k. = GF(5^5)
> sage: E = EllipticCurve(k,[2,4])
> sage: M = E.cardinality(); M
> 3227
> sage: type(M)
>
>
> }}}
>
> I'm sure I can fix this, but
That seem reasonable to me. If users expected the number of digits to
always equal the length of the string representation, then what about
negative integers?
Of course we could restrict the ndigits() function to positive integers only...
John
On 03/04/2008, Joel B. Mohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Apr 3, 2008, at 12:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Apr 3, 11:39 am, "Timothy Clemans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> So write your script and then do "sage -python blah.py"
>
> Timothy
>
> Thanks. My specific "python script" is a full blown python web app/
> server that I want to invoke
On Apr 3, 11:39 am, "Timothy Clemans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> So write your script and then do "sage -python blah.py"
Timothy
Thanks. My specific "python script" is a full blown python web app/
server that I want to invoke Sage on behalf of various brower
clients.
By doing your idea..."
On Thursday 03 April 2008 15:14, John Cremona wrote:
> We have to regard 0 as a special case, I don't think there's any point
> in pretending otherwise. If all leading zeros were stripped off in
> all cases then the string representing 0 would be the empty string,
> and obviously that would be si
I'm fine with these, but actually any fast way will work for me.
On Apr 3, 9:17 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What do people think of ctrl-enter to split, and ctrl-backspace to join with
> previous?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage
The patch at #2653 whias was merged for 2.11 was supposed to fix this:
{{{
sage: k. = GF(5^5)
sage: E = EllipticCurve(k,[2,4])
sage: M = E.cardinality(); M
3227
sage: type(M)
}}}
I'm sure I can fix this, but should I reopen that ticket or open a new one?
John Cremona
--~--~-~--~~
We have to regard 0 as a special case, I don't think there's any point
in pretending otherwise. If all leading zeros were stripped off in
all cases then the string representing 0 would be the empty string,
and obviously that would be silly.
I went to see what the degree of the 0 polynomial is in
You have to use the Python install included with Sage which has
everything you need.
So write your script and then do "sage -python blah.py"
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 11:35 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I saw the example that used Expect to invoke Sage from an external
> pr
I saw the example that used Expect to invoke Sage from an external
program.
Is Expect necessary from Python scripts too?
Can I just import some sage modules and then call some functions from
Python?
Chris
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
> I don't see the need, and I'm always leery of overpopulating the
> namespace :-} You already have the functionality, and with '?', it is
> easily accessible.
I don't always support synonyms but I do want all those little helper
functions. The point is to make it easy to read code -- eigensy
On Apr 3, 2008, at 3:38 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
> ways to get eigenvalues and eigenvectors and it is hard to remember
> which function goes with which type.
>
> How about we unify the interface?
+1 This has bothered me too.
On Apr 3, 7:37 am, Alex Ghitza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess this is a question of convention, and depends on how you think
> of "digit":
>
> (1) a digit is a symbol used to construct representations of numbers,
> and so the base 10 digits are: "0", "1", ..., "9". In this case,
> 0.ndigits
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Gary Furnish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe. I see two real issues.
> 1) Sage right now has really bad global namespace pollution issues that make
> it very hard to import just one or two files. I don't see why this
> shouldn't be fixable, it just needs s
What about including the eigenvalue multiplicities as well?
John
On 03/04/2008, Justin C. Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2008, at 07:52 , Alex Ghitza wrote:
> >
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > William Stein wrote:
> > | On Thu, Apr 3, 2008
I've played with this some -- ctrl-s is frequently the shortcut to save -- in
most browsers, to save the current webpage do disk.
What do people think of ctrl-enter to split, and ctrl-backspace to join with
previous?
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, bill purvis wrote:
>
> On Thursday 03 April 2008, Andre
On Apr 3, 2008, at 07:52 , Alex Ghitza wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> William Stein wrote:
> | On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Justin C. Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> |>
> |> On Apr 3, 2008, at 03:38 , Jason Grout wrote:
[snip]
> |> I don't see the need
On Thursday 03 April 2008 10:37, Alex Ghitza wrote:
> Note that at the moment 0.digits() does (2) and 0.ndigits() does (1),
> which is really bad.
Yes, this is very bad. I was not aware of the ndigits convention until after
the digits patch I wrote was included. On this topic, we also need a v
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
William Stein wrote:
| On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Justin C. Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|>
|> On Apr 3, 2008, at 03:38 , Jason Grout wrote:
|> >
|> > Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
|> > ways to get
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 7:27 AM, Justin C. Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2008, at 03:38 , Jason Grout wrote:
> >
> > Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
> > ways to get eigenvalues and eigenvectors and it is hard to remember
> > which functi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joel B. Mohler wrote:
|
| Since I was the last person to touch the digits method, I'll state my
case.
| Note that digits was (I think) inconsistent in this regard before my
| modifications -- I believe binary was different than other bases, but
I don'
On Apr 3, 2008, at 03:38 , Jason Grout wrote:
>
> Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
> ways to get eigenvalues and eigenvectors and it is hard to remember
> which function goes with which type.
>
> How about we unify the interface?
>
> Proposal:
>
> eigenspaces:
On Apr 3, 2008, at 10:05 AM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
> I intentionally made 0.digits() return [] because that seems to me
> the most
> consistent mathematical thing to do.
+1
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegro
Hello folks,
it has been a while since Bug Day 10. We also had two Doc Days and two
Sage Days since then, so that somewhat explains while there has been
relatively activity in this direction. But before anybody can announce
another Doc Day I would suggest doing Bug Day 11 on April 5th. The
usual
On Thursday 03 April 2008 08:51, vgermrk wrote:
> Hi! I want to hear your opinions about a little problem.
>
> The following bug is already reported as #2232:
> "1.digits(16,'0123456789abcdef')" returns "['1']"
> but "0.digits(16,'0123456789abcdef')" returns "[]" (and not "['0']"
> as i wish)
S
I'm cross-posting this to sage-devel and sage-combinat. I know
that's a mailing list no-no and I promise not to do it again
but I think there's people on both lists that I'm writing this to.
The original thread was started by Joel Mohler on March 12.
> For starters, I'd like to have two big pie
On Thursday 03 April 2008, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> How about Ctrl+s split at the current line and Ctrl+m merge with the
> previous one? (Or next one, I am not sure which one is more natural.)
>
I'd go for the next one.
Seems more intuitive, but I have a warped sense of humour
Surely ctrl+
Hi! I want to hear your opinions about a little problem.
The following bug is already reported as #2232:
"1.digits(16,'0123456789abcdef')" returns "['1']"
but "0.digits(16,'0123456789abcdef')" returns "[]" (and not "['0']"
as i wish)
So i started looking at the code to fix this little problem.
> One feature that would be really nice is to have distinct text cells,
> in html or even better latex mode. A text cell could created by a hot key
> (say
> ) in edit mode which displays the source latex or html, then toggled
> out
> of edit mode to display the formatted text. This could be ni
David Joyner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
>> ways to get eigenvalues and eigenvectors and it is hard to remember
>> which function goes with which type.
>>
>> How about we
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
> ways to get eigenvalues and eigenvectors and it is hard to remember
> which function goes with which type.
>
> How about we unify the interface?
>
>
Currently, depending on the matrix type, there are several different
ways to get eigenvalues and eigenvectors and it is hard to remember
which function goes with which type.
How about we unify the interface?
Proposal:
eigenspaces: Return a list of tuples, the first element being an
eigenvalu
On Apr 3, 10:08 am, janwil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just downloaded the last stable 2.11 package to my 64-bit Arch Linux
> box and tried to run ./sage. The resulting log is as follows:
>
> : libgfortran.so.1: cannot open shared
> object file: No such file or directory
> sage:
Hi all,
I just downloaded the last stable 2.11 package to my 64-bit Arch Linux
box and tried to run ./sage. The resulting log is as follows:
$ ./sage
--
| SAGE Version 2.11, Release Date: 2008-03-30|
| Ty
40 matches
Mail list logo
