I have on any cell is too large for a single screen. It made showing
an iterative change in a function hard to see, because I would have to
scroll down to show the graph.
--
David Monarres
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? Who knows? Who cares?"
On Oct 22, 2008, at 6
Hi,
I'll open a trac ticket for this, as soon as I can figure out a
reasonable description
(this evening or tomorrow).
Cheers,
gsw
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
By the way, I would be interested to know, I they get a result at all
with F5 in this example (this would already be great, but no
pizza ;-) ).
Michael
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gr
> That's what I was about to ask. Interesting! How much faster?
>
> William
I think the very first reason is, that the Singular scripting language
is strictly inferior to Python
(this is why I support Sage).
Nevertheless. I just uploaded some nice example to the wiki, for
testing your F5 impl
On Oct 22, 10:36 pm, "Georg S. Weber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
> It'll take some time to get acquainted to it, but it already showed me
> that
> while executing the following line:
>
> sage: for i in range(100): float(1)/2
>
> the sage.bin process calls quite often "posix_stat", "p
Hi,
On 21 Okt., 22:54, "Justin C. Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2008, at 13:26 , Georg S. Weber wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > On 21 Okt., 20:59, Emmanuel Thomé <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Hmm, it turns out that it's not just any code that triggers this
> >> behaviour. Howev
On Oct 22, 2008, at 7:13 PM, Ronan Paixão wrote:
> I also believe the bottom graph looks noisy.
> Maybe clipping only the first third of the graph and stretching it to
> fill the ad's width could make it better?
I actually like the graph at the bottom, but it also depends on how
large a format
I also believe the bottom graph looks noisy.
Maybe clipping only the first third of the graph and stretching it to
fill the ad's width could make it better?
Otherwise, it looks like a very quality work. What did you use to design
it? Inkscape?
,
Ronan Paixão
Em Qua, 2008-10-22 às 16:56 -0700, m
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 at 05:36PM -0500, Jason Grout wrote:
> For me, one of the very big features on the notebook is that it's online
> and it enhances collaboration. It's very easy for me to post up a
> worksheet for my class or my collaborators can download or modify. So
> what about making th
I notice that lots of times, when changing the value of a control in an
interact and the interact updates, the notebook automatically scrolls up
so that the interact is only partially shown. I think that what is
happening is the focus is changing to a previous cell or something. I
get this h
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 at 04:56PM -0700, mhampton wrote:
> I don't really like the bottom, it seems too busy to me with the graph
> in the background. I really like the top three panels.
I agree, the graph seems a bit much...but the ad will be 190mm; if it
looks better when printed, then I say keep
I don't really like the bottom, it seems too busy to me with the graph
in the background. I really like the top three panels.
I'm curious why this is going in a newspaper - ?
Cheers,
Marshall
On Oct 22, 5:01 pm, "Harald Schilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all, as those who attended SD10 a
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:47 PM, john_perry_usm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Is it still true that Perry is working on putting a version in Singular?
>
> I personally am not writing the code. I did offer, but Christian Eder,
> a student at the University of Kaiserslautern, has the primary
> res
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:13 AM, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This looks beautiful. It looks fine to me. Some grammatical ideas:
> (a) I think you can say "open source" instead of "open-source, even though
> what you have is correct.
On a note of consistency, the text "open-source"
A company doesn't need to register a trademark in order to use the
"TM" symbol. Maybe you should ask the advertising agency if you need a
notice stating that Mathematica is a registered trademark of Wolfram
Research, etc or if you need the "TM" symbol at all.
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Hara
> Is it still true that Perry is working on putting a version in Singular?
I personally am not writing the code. I did offer, but Christian Eder,
a student at the University of Kaiserslautern, has the primary
responsibility. (I had worked with him on the original toy
implementation as an interpre
Harald Schilly wrote:
> Hi all, as those who attended SD10 already know, I was working on an
> advertisement for Sage. Before it gets actually printed (on real
> paper), I want to collect some feedback, especially since I've never
> done such a thing before... What bothers me most is the text, ple
On Oct 23, 12:29 am, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That said, we could put the TM in anyways for
> symmetry, ...
yes, that's true, but i have no idea if it is necessary at all. Also,
if a (in my eyes) silly "TM" is enough. It also depends if it is a
trademark where it is printed an
This looks very good! In the last paragraph, I might reword it as
"You can interact with and manipulate mathematical objects through
the powerful notebook interface."
Also, what does it look like if you left-justify the smaller text?
- Robert
On Oct 22, 2008, at 3:13 PM, David Joyner wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Jason Grout
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Harald Schilly wrote:
>> Hi all, as those who attended SD10 already know, I was working on an
>> advertisement for Sage. Before it gets actually printed (on real
>> paper), I want to collect some feedback, especially since
Harald Schilly wrote:
> Hi all, as those who attended SD10 already know, I was working on an
> advertisement for Sage. Before it gets actually printed (on real
> paper), I want to collect some feedback, especially since I've never
> done such a thing before... What bothers me most is the text, ple
This looks beautiful. It looks fine to me. Some grammatical ideas:
(a) I think you can say "open source" instead of "open-source, even though
what you have is correct.
(b) Possibly "Python based" should be Python-based".
(c) "Numerous methods ..." Could be worded "Use the numerous software package
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Harald Schilly
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all, as those who attended SD10 already know, I was working on an
> advertisement for Sage. Before it gets actually printed (on real
> paper), I want to collect some feedback, especially since I've never
> done such
Hi all, as those who attended SD10 already know, I was working on an
advertisement for Sage. Before it gets actually printed (on real
paper), I want to collect some feedback, especially since I've never
done such a thing before... What bothers me most is the text, please
do proofreading or suggest
Hi folks,
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:25 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello folks,
>
> due to the init.sage vs. IPython SNAFU I have just released a Sage
> 3.1.4 with two additional small fixes. Sources and a sage.math only
> binary (this time tested to extract :)) are in
>
> http:/
2008/10/22 Jason Grout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> David Joyner wrote:
>> I'll have to wait until I get home from work to test it out but the
>> patch looks like you've added a lot of nice functionality. My original
>> thought was
>> to include more of the legend options in the method itself (instead
2008/10/22 David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I'll have to wait until I get home from work to test it out but the
> patch looks like you've added a lot of nice functionality. My original
> thought was
> to include more of the legend options in the method itself (instead of having
> several meth
The following is apparently not implemented (see 3.1.2 traceback at
bottom):
---
sage: R. = PolynomialRing(Integers(), 2)
sage: (x1*x2).factor()
---
However, I think it would be trivial to implement: change the base
ring of the polynomial to Rationals() and then factor. I believe the
result return
I think there is value for development and education in having them
both in. Is it still true that Perry is working on putting a version
in Singular? Even so, if someone improves the cython version it seems
possible that it could become very competitive.
-M. Hampton
On Oct 22, 11:26 am, "David
Hi,
On 22 Okt., 16:20, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/10/22 Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:51 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> >> 2008/10/22 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >>> On Oct 22, 5:14 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Martin Albrecht
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 22 October 2008, Simon King wrote:
>> Dear Team,
>>
>> at SD 10, Martin Albrecht and I implemented the F5 algorithm according
>> to John Perry's pseudocode. The two implementations are at
>> http://wiki.s
On Wednesday 22 October 2008, Mike Hansen wrote:
> Nicolas Thiery mentioned that F5 works for a class non-commutative
> rings so that might be a reason for including it.
Hi there,
I don't see why F5 would be better suited for non-commutative rings than the
Buchberger (except for speed of course
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 9:53 AM, Martin Albrecht
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The question is: What purpose would such an implementation have:
> (a) educational (i.e. quite read-able/hack-able code)
> (b) coverage (i.e. provide GB calculations for fields Singular doesn't
> support)
Nicolas Thiery
On Wednesday 22 October 2008, Simon King wrote:
> Dear Team,
>
> at SD 10, Martin Albrecht and I implemented the F5 algorithm according
> to John Perry's pseudocode. The two implementations are at
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/days10/CodingSprint
> attachment f5.py (Martin's pure python implementatio
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear Team,
>
> at SD 10, Martin Albrecht and I implemented the F5 algorithm according
> to John Perry's pseudocode. The two implementations are at
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/days10/CodingSprint
> attachment f5.py (Martin's
Dear Team,
at SD 10, Martin Albrecht and I implemented the F5 algorithm according
to John Perry's pseudocode. The two implementations are at
http://wiki.sagemath.org/days10/CodingSprint
attachment f5.py (Martin's pure python implementation) respectively
f5.pyx (my cython implementation).
These a
2008/10/22 Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:51 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
>> 2008/10/22 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 22, 5:14 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While working on #3318 I cam across a really terrible bug introduced
On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:51 AM, John Cremona wrote:
> 2008/10/22 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 22, 5:14 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> While working on #3318 I cam across a really terrible bug introduced
>>> between 3.1.4 and 3.2.alpha0 in the file sage/rings/in
David Joyner wrote:
> I'll have to wait until I get home from work to test it out but the
> patch looks like you've added a lot of nice functionality. My original
> thought was
> to include more of the legend options in the method itself (instead of having
> several methods which set them) but you
2008/10/22 mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
> On Oct 22, 5:14 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> While working on #3318 I cam across a really terrible bug introduced
>> between 3.1.4 and 3.2.alpha0 in the file sage/rings/integer.pyx which
>> produces the following terrible thing:
On Oct 22, 5:14 am, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While working on #3318 I cam across a really terrible bug introduced
> between 3.1.4 and 3.2.alpha0 in the file sage/rings/integer.pyx which
> produces the following terrible thing:
>
> --
On Oct 22, 4:46 am, Bill Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've released FLINT 1.0.16 which fixes a couple of segfaults
> (including one Craig Citro reported) and an s390 build issue (reported
> by Tim Abbot). Specifically:
>
> * Segfault when truncating a polynomial with a length lo
While working on #3318 I cam across a really terrible bug introduced
between 3.1.4 and 3.2.alpha0 in the file sage/rings/integer.pyx which
produces the following terrible thing:
--
| SAGE Version 3.2.alpha0, Release Date: 2008-10
Hi all,
I've released FLINT 1.0.16 which fixes a couple of segfaults
(including one Craig Citro reported) and an s390 build issue (reported
by Tim Abbot). Specifically:
* Segfault when truncating a polynomial with a length longer than the
existing polynomial using fmpz_poly_truncate
* Segfault w
I'll have to wait until I get home from work to test it out but the
patch looks like you've added a lot of nice functionality. My original
thought was
to include more of the legend options in the method itself (instead of having
several methods which set them) but you have so many options,
that wo
45 matches
Mail list logo
