On Apr 21, 7:33 am, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
dortmund.de> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 6:48 am, "Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 7:22 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
> > GCL uses the C compiler directly. I am not suggesting that GCL is
> > necessarily the "right" lisp for
Perhaps these test failures are known and are being fixed, but here are
the failures I got with 3.0.rc0 on Ubuntu Hardy, 32 bit:
The following tests failed:
sage -t devel/sage/sage/rings/polynomial/laurent_polynomial_ring.py
sage -t devel/sage/sage/server/simple/twist.py
s
On Apr 21, 6:48 am, "Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 7:22 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> GCL uses the C compiler directly. I am not suggesting that GCL is
> necessarily the "right" lisp for Sage (or even that Sage needs a lisp
> compiler at all) but I do rather think yo
On Apr 21, 6:48 am, "Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 7:22 PM, mabshoff wrote:
Hi Bill,
> > I do not doubt that gcl is a good tool, but I doubt it is a good tool
> > to use in Sage.
> > ...
> > > > In the end it all boils down to platform support and I see ecls
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 7:22 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> ...
> I do not doubt that gcl is a good tool, but I doubt it is a good tool
> to use in Sage.
> ...
> > > In the end it all boils down to platform support and I see ecls as
> > > the silver bullet here for Sage+lisp.
> >
> Tim Daly wrote:
> > I
On Apr 21, 4:01 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Apr 20, 7:53 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is it possible for you to try using GCC < 4.3? Version 4.3 is a very
> > new compiler, and we (=Michael Abshoff) had to fix a *lot* (!) of
> > issues in many of the components of
On Apr 20, 7:53 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it possible for you to try using GCC < 4.3? Version 4.3 is a very
> new compiler, and we (=Michael Abshoff) had to fix a *lot* (!) of
> issues in many of the components of Sage just to get it to compile
> at all with GCC 4.3.
>
>
>> In any case, it is certainly possible to use lisp as a library
>> element rather than using pexpect. I'm not sure why ECLS is special
>> in this context since I've never used it.
>
>I am not aware of any other lisp interpreter that you can easily embed
>in a C library. Can you point me to one?
On Apr 21, 3:38 am, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I have no idea why you think ECLS is a silver bullet.
Hi Tim,
> >I forgot one important argument here: With ecls you can embed the lisp
> >interpreter into an external library, hence we would be able to use
> >Maxima as a library instead o
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 6:38 PM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> I have no idea why you think ECLS is a silver bullet.
> >
> >I forgot one important argument here: With ecls you can embed the lisp
> >interpreter into an external library, hence we would be able to use
> >Maxima as a lib
On Apr 21, 2:20 am, Francois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apparently this is an optimization bug again with gcc4.3, we have
> some
> reports on it in gentoo
> bugzilla:http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54738#c27
> It shows up at a different place than gcc4.2.2 but forcing -O0 the
> same
>
mabshoff wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> Here goes 3.0.rc0. We knocked out a couple blocker, merged the new
> R pexpect interface. This release should also build out of the box
> on RHEL 5/Itanium and SLES 10/Itanium without the need to set any
> FORTRAN env variables. We have a new blocker (#2972), so
>> I have no idea why you think ECLS is a silver bullet.
>
>I forgot one important argument here: With ecls you can embed the lisp
>interpreter into an external library, hence we would be able to use
>Maxima as a library instead of using the inefficient pexpect
>interface. I am not sure how much w
On Apr 21, 11:53 am, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yep, same-ish here: not too old laptop, new Fedora, gcc4.3.0 et al.
> > If there's anything else helpful let me know and I'll post it.
>
> Is it possible for you
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 4:22 PM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > In the end it all boils down to platform support and I see ecls as the
> > > silver bullet here for Sage+lisp.
> >
> > I have no idea why you think ECLS is a silver bullet. Three years ago
> > I
> > moved Axiom onto
On Apr 21, 12:46 am, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Tim,
> I have no idea why you think ECLS is a silver bullet.
I forgot one important argument here: With ecls you can embed the lisp
interpreter into an external library, hence we would be able to use
Maxima as a library instead of us
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 2:44 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yep, same-ish here: not too old laptop, new Fedora, gcc4.3.0 et al.
> If there's anything else helpful let me know and I'll post it.
>
Is it possible for you to try using GCC < 4.3? Version 4.3 is a very
new compiler, and we (=Mi
On Apr 21, 12:46 am, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Tim,
> > After I posted about *my* intention to make clisp disappear from Sage
> > in the long term at alt.sci.symbolic William and I got in a long off
> > list discussion with Fateman about Maxima, Axiom, Sage and lisp in
> > general.
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 at 09:34AM -0700, gerhard wrote:
> PS: anybody got beamer with sagetex to work?
What problems are you having? Beamer and SageTeX are largely orthogonal,
but there are some tricky bits with verbatim environments, which are
covered in the documentation. If there are other proble
Dear Tim!
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:46 AM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > After I posted about *my* intention to make clisp disappear from Sage
> > in the long term at alt.sci.symbolic William and I got in a long off
> > list discussion with Fateman about Maxima, Axiom, Sage and l
Hi Martin,
It would be awesome if you'd be interested in porting your guessing
code to Sage/Python -- in fact, Nicolas Thiery talked to me about this
just last Thursday. I'm sure that a number of people would be
interested in the code. We're working on building up a community of
people interest
> After I posted about *my* intention to make clisp disappear from Sage
> in the long term at alt.sci.symbolic William and I got in a long off
> list discussion with Fateman about Maxima, Axiom, Sage and lisp in
> general. Among the point Fateman made about me pointing out that
> building lisp fr
On Apr 20, 5:23 pm, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 5:13 PM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I'm surprised by how convinced you are that using a specific
> > > technology/language -- literate programming -- can be a silver
> > > bullet to solve such
On Apr 20, 8:13 pm, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Tim,
> > There are rumblings but *definitely* no specific plans to remove
> > lisp or maxima.
>
> Lisp has already solved a lot of the problems Python has yet to
> face.
Sure, but how about reading "Lisp: Good News, Bad News, How to W
Yep, same-ish here: not too old laptop, new Fedora, gcc4.3.0 et al.
If there's anything else helpful let me know and I'll post it.
/proc/cpuinfo:
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 14
model name : Genuine Intel(R) CPU T2050 @
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 2:13 PM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm surprised by how convinced you are that using a specific
> > technology/language -- literate programming -- can be a silver
> > bullet to solve such a difficult problem. I think peer review,
> > and many many other
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 5:13 PM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm surprised by how convinced you are that using a specific
> > technology/language -- literate programming -- can be a silver
> > bullet to solve such a difficult problem. I think peer review,
> > and many many other
> I'm surprised by how convinced you are that using a specific
> technology/language -- literate programming -- can be a silver
> bullet to solve such a difficult problem. I think peer review,
> and many many other things, are steps in the right direction,
> but *not* solutions to the problem. I
Sage does include linear programming. But this looks like a good thing
to support in general.
¬M. Hampton
On 20 avr, 22:50, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 1:22 PM, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > +1 from me as well. There have been a few times re
> Sorry I was mainly interested in how many lines of code, in
> some rough sense, are in the Axiom codebase, since this
> whole thread started discussing the difficulties involved with
> the code size of Axiom (since it's about combining source
> code for project). I'm still really curious how b
On Apr 20, 9:07 pm, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The 4Ms cannot make this kind of leap. The corporate structure won't
> allow anything so innovative to set direction. In fact, I doubt you
> could get Google, despite its corporate cleverness, to even consider
> funding the development of
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 10:50 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 1:22 PM, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > +1 from me as well. There have been a few times recently when I've
> > wished Sage included a component for solving linear programming
I have exactly same problem, there are specs:
Arch Linux latests (so GCC 4.3 and friends)
Machine quite old, 512MB of RAM, below I include /proc/cpuinfo...
sorry - no log (deleted dir, maybe tomorrow will try again, I had
troubles downloading so I thought it can be corrupted archive or
something
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 1:22 PM, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> +1 from me as well. There have been a few times recently when I've
> wished Sage included a component for solving linear programming or
> integer programming optimization problems.
Does OpenOpt do either of those things
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Soroosh Yazdani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would be nice if one had a way of checking the code of a procedure that
> is called inside of another function. Specifically, when you type
> M.myfunc??, sage prints out the source code, and in many cases, this code i
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 12:07 PM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > > A good unifying graphical interface is extremely important to creating
> > > something that is a viable alternative to
> > > Maple/Mathematica/Magma/Matlab. In some sense it is perhaps it
> > > is *the* most im
It would be nice if one had a way of checking the code of a procedure that
is called inside of another function. Specifically, when you type
M.myfunc??, sage prints out the source code, and in many cases, this code is
very generic, that calls another function, possibly after checking some
boundary
+1 from me as well. There have been a few times recently when I've
wished Sage included a component for solving linear programming or
integer programming optimization problems.
David
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Harald Schilly
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 20, 4:42 pm, "William Ste
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 11:13 AM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > How does the fricas/axiom source code layout work?
> > Is it all written in pamphlets that lisp is generated from?
>
> There is a bit of a philosophical split between Axiom and
> Fricas about source code layout and it
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 12:07 PM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 20, 3:57 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > IMHO, I don't think removing lisp or maxima will happen anytime soon. Lots
> of
> > topics are open for discussion on the sage-devel list, and
On Apr 20, 6:25 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:14 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Sage 3.0rc0, this is what I get:
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there any chance you could send us any information at
> all that might help to debug this problem? E.g., your c
> > A good unifying graphical interface is extremely important to creating
> > something that is a viable alternative to
> > Maple/Mathematica/Magma/Matlab. In some sense it is perhaps it
> > is *the* most important thing.
I fully agree that a unifying graphical interface is extremely
impor
On Apr 20, 3:57 pm, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMHO, I don't think removing lisp or maxima will happen anytime soon. Lots of
> topics are open for discussion on the sage-devel list, and William
> Stein of course
> makes the final decision,
David,
you are wrong about William
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 1:01 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I hope you fix this and submit a patch :-)
Yeah I know talk is cheap. :-) but if there is no users what is the point?
Same happened to the livecd. I was thinking on creating an optional package
for OpenAxiom but just a
Hi William,
On 04/20/2008 05:29 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> > On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 3:10 AM, Martin Rubey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > I don't have the guts to send this to a public mailing list. I
>> probably
>> > > should. If you want to, you have my permission.
>> > >
>> >
> How does the fricas/axiom source code layout work?
> Is it all written in pamphlets that lisp is generated from?
There is a bit of a philosophical split between Axiom and
Fricas about source code layout and it is fairly fundamental.
Axiom has everything in pamphlet files and is gradually movi
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Alfredo Portes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi William,
>
> Given that I started this thread, I will try to share some of my ideas
> regarding your questions.
>
> I am not an Axiom developer, probably Bill Page can answer
> these questions better than anybo
On the following machine:
Linux sillyname 2.6.22-gentoo-r5 #2 SMP Tue Aug 28 23:46:12 UTC 2007
i686 Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6400 @ 2.13GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
it compiled fine and passed all tests with one exception:
sage -t devel/sage/sage/interfaces/r.py
*
Hi William,
Given that I started this thread, I will try to share some of my ideas
regarding your questions.
I am not an Axiom developer, probably Bill Page can answer
these questions better than anybody.
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 10:29 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Sage
> PS: anybody got beamer with sagetex to work?
Yep. Franco Saliola posted some slides with the source of a talk he
gave awhile back:
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_frm/thread/be12e21544158624/e3d60d77ef171168?lnk=gst&q=slides+first+sage+franco#e3d60d77ef171168
--Mike
--~--~
Hmm,
looks like everybody has all the features they want!
And yes, the notebook is REALLY NICE to have...
Seriously, though, I would like to
split a notebook into distinct pages
for easy presentation in talks and classes.
-gerhard
PS: anybody got beamer with sagetex to work?
--~--~-~
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:14 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sage 3.0rc0, this is what I get:
>
> gcc -g -O2 -W -Wswitch -Wcomment -Wpointer-arith -Wimplicit -Wreturn-
> type -Wmissing-declarations -Wno-sign-compare -O2 -fexpensive-
> optimizations -falign-functions=4 -DNO_MULTIMAP_SHM -DN
Sage 3.0rc0, this is what I get:
gcc -g -O2 -W -Wswitch -Wcomment -Wpointer-arith -Wimplicit -Wreturn-
type -Wmissing-declarations -Wno-sign-compare -O2 -fexpensive-
optimizations -falign-functions=4 -DNO_MULTIMAP_SHM -DNO_MULTIMAP_FILE
-DNO_SINGLEMAP -DNO_TRIVIALMAP -DUNICODE -DNO_SIGSEGV -I. -x
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 6:57 AM, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Martin, Bill:
>
> Thanks for these very interesting emails! Some of my reactions are below.
>
> - David Joyner
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Martin,
> >
> >
Hi Martin!
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 3:57 PM, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Martin, Bill:
>
> Thanks for these very interesting emails! Some of my reactions are below.
>
> - David Joyner
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Mart
On Apr 20, 4:42 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OpenOpt
+1
I've already requested it some time ago I think. Since I've a strong
background in numerical optimization and computation, i know about the
difficulties involved. Inclusion would help to expose OpenOpt to a
larger userba
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 10:42 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Should we include OpenOpt in Sage:
> http://scipy.org/scipy/scikits/wiki/OpenOpt
+1
>
> I noticed it when looking at GSoC applications for the Python software
> foundation. That application is as foll
Hi,
Should we include OpenOpt in Sage:
http://scipy.org/scipy/scikits/wiki/OpenOpt
I noticed it when looking at GSoC applications for the Python software
foundation. That application is as follows:
OpenOpt had been created in 2006 as MATLAB/Octave numerical
optimization toolbox, and later
Hi Martin, Bill:
Thanks for these very interesting emails! Some of my reactions are below.
- David Joyner
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Martin,
>
> I think discussing things like off the email lists does more damage to
> the community then it would
All tests passed!
Total time for all tests: 2339.5 seconds
grep: /home/jec/sage-3.0.rc0/tmp/test-dsage.log: No such file or directory
Please see /home/jec/sage-3.0.rc0/tmp/test.log for the complete log
from this test.
John
2008/4/20 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> Here goes
Hello folks,
Here goes 3.0.rc0. We knocked out a couple blocker, merged the new
R pexpect interface. This release should also build out of the box
on RHEL 5/Itanium and SLES 10/Itanium without the need to set any
FORTRAN env variables. We have a new blocker (#2972), some doctest
failures with the
Now that's a really pure-mathematical suggestion!
John
2008/4/20 Nils Bruin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Just a thought: if for some reason, the click event gets registered
> twice instead of once, one would go around a cycle of length 3 "the
> wrong way around". Perhaps change the cycle length a
mabshoff wrote:
> Folks,
>
> here we go with 3.0.alpha6.
On Fedora 7, 32 bits:
--
All tests passed!
Total time for all tests: 4916.4 seconds
grep: /home/jaap/downloads/sage-3.0.alpha6/tmp/test-dsage.log: No such file or
direct
Just a thought: if for some reason, the click event gets registered
twice instead of once, one would go around a cycle of length 3 "the
wrong way around". Perhaps change the cycle length and see how that
affects the bug?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group,
64 matches
Mail list logo
