[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: axiom

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > but > programming in Mathematica is not fun. And that would be the understatement of the week. Cheers, f --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegrou

[sage-devel] sagemath.org issues

I am having a problem with sagemath.org: the Download button on the first page now links to http://sagemath.org/download-mac.html, not the general download page. Is this intentional? Along these lines, when might binaries be posted for 3.1.1, and when will the on-line documentation be updated?

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

On Aug 17, 7:31 pm, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've been thinking about editing the Sage Programming Guide, and I > have many questions. See for a first draft. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

On Aug 19, 2008, at 11:43 AM, John H Palmieri wrote: > > On Aug 19, 3:00 am, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> On Tuesday 19 August 2008, mhampton wrote: >> > - the SPKG inclusion guidelines should probably also go into > the Dev > manual. >> >> I meant: >> >>htt

[sage-devel] Re: netiquette: quoting emails

On 20/08/2008, at 1:41 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: > >> Hence, deleting unneeded portions helps the reader. > > Strong +1. This list is particularly bad for quoting an entire > message, 5 levels deep, only to add "I agree" at the very end. I don't feel strongly about it. But I am much more lik

[sage-devel] Understanding __init__ in ode_solver

I'm really excited about Sage's potential for combining a powerful CAS with numerical differential equation solving. Solving ODEs in matlab can be kind of tedious because it's often necessary to do a bunch of algebra to get things in the right form. Mathematica, on the other hand, will do most o

[sage-devel] Bug Day 13: August 23rd, 2008

Hello folks, I would like to suggest a Buh Day for this Saturday, August 23rd, 2008. We will start at 10 am PST and go on until the last person is exhausted. If you plan to participate please add youself to http://wiki.sagemath.org/bug13 Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---

[sage-devel] Re: netiquette: quoting emails

Dear Simon, On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And now imagine an answer to an answer to an answer. It would be quite > time consuming to find out which tiny part of a long text with nested > comments is relevant for the answer. > > Hence, deleting unneeded

[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: axiom

Hi Bill, On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yes, certainly I think Axiom domains are viable. Another way of asking >> this question is: if static strongly typed language with first-order >> polymorphic dependent types is viable? I think this has been answered

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

On Aug 19, 3:00 am, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 19 August 2008, mhampton wrote: > > > > >  - the SPKG inclusion guidelines should probably also go into the Dev > > > > manual. > > I meant: > >    http://wiki.sagemath.org/spkg/InclusionProcedure Great, I don't think I

[sage-devel] Fwd: [FSF] Submit your nominations for the 2008 Free Software Awards

I know it may be a long shot, but I would like to ask this group for its recommendations regarding the nomination of William Stein and/or Sage for the Advancement of FS and/or Award for Projects of Social Benefit, resp.. Previous winners of the Advancement of FS include Lawrence Lessig (of Creati

[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: axiom

>> I would be glad (with your permission) to post this question and my >> reply on-list somewhere - sage-devel if you prefer. >> >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: >>> Hi Bill, >>> >>> since you know both Python and Aldor or Axiom and now you know >>> Sage quite a bit, do you

[sage-devel] Fwd: axiom

-- Forwarded message -- From: Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 4:23 AM Subject: Re: axiom To: Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yes, please post it to sage-devel and I'll reply there. I wasn't sure what your reply would be, so I started offlist. :) Ondre

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.1.final is out

On Aug 19, 12:12 am, Stan Schymanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Stan, > As mentioned before, the "sage -upgrade" from sage 3.0.5 did not work > for me, but a fresh compilation of the sage-3.1.1.tar into a new > directory worked fine on my PowerBook Pro 2.4 GHz with os 10.4.11. I > am trying

[sage-devel] Re: sage-3.1.1 : Gnutls compilation failure

On Aug 18, 1:20 pm, bourbabis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello everybody. > > Everything is in the title. The install log : > > http://download69.mediafire.com/fzzdvb2dymmg/mykrpj3thu6/install.log.bz2 > > Thanks. Hi, this is the same problem as you reported last time. For some reason some pa

[sage-devel] Re: netiquette: quoting emails

> Hence, deleting unneeded portions helps the reader. Strong +1. This list is particularly bad for quoting an entire message, 5 levels deep, only to add "I agree" at the very end. Nick --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googl

[sage-devel] Re: initial giac spkg

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 7:54 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Aug 18, 10:37 am, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Martin Albrecht > > Hi, > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> Ah I see thanks. I used some other spkg package as a tem

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 2:59 AM, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tuesday 19 August 2008, John H Palmieri wrote: >> It says: >> "You might also write additional documentation in \Latex, which is not >> to >> be part of any source code file. The examples in this documentation >> s

[sage-devel] Re: netiquette: quoting emails

Dear Ondrej, On Aug 19, 12:08 pm, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I noticed by accident in some other thread that some people don't like > when I quote the whole emails. So I wanted to ask > if it really causes such big problems. Modern mail readers like gmail > handle this just fine

[sage-devel] netiquette: quoting emails

Hi, I noticed by accident in some other thread that some people don't like when I quote the whole emails. So I wanted to ask if it really causes such big problems. Modern mail readers like gmail handle this just fine imho. Or if you think one should properly delete unneeded portions by hand. Ond

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

On Tuesday 19 August 2008, mhampton wrote: > > > - the SPKG inclusion guidelines should probably also go into the Dev > > > manual. > > > > Where can I find these guidelines? > > http://wiki.sagemath.org/TracGuidelines These are the Trac guidelines, I meant: http://wiki.sagemath.org/spkg/Inc

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

On Tuesday 19 August 2008, John H Palmieri wrote: > It says: > "You might also write additional documentation in \Latex, which is not > to > be part of any source code file. The examples in this documentation > should be contained in verbatim environments. The examples should be > tested using \

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

> Although these improvements could possibly go in TracGuidelines, I > feel that they may be useful in developer docs, (especially for new > developers, I'm sure both of these points are non-issues for seasoned > developers). My impression is: The wiki is a wonderful resource of outdated, random

[sage-devel] Re: questions about the "Programming guide"

I'd also like to add a couple of issues I had with the sage documentation: The process of submitting a patch isn't documented clearly enough. For example, nowhere does it say that if you have a ticked with a patch, you need to manually add [with patch; needs review] It would be nice to have an up

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 3.1.final is out

As mentioned before, the "sage -upgrade" from sage 3.0.5 did not work for me, but a fresh compilation of the sage-3.1.1.tar into a new directory worked fine on my PowerBook Pro 2.4 GHz with os 10.4.11. I am trying it out right now and my notebooks seem to work faster than with the previous version