On Jan 17, 6:57 pm, William Stein wrote:
> > And lrs can be build as a library and probably will so be integrated
> > in Sage in the future. Since there are issues with LLP64 this is not a
> > fun thing to debug, i.e. anything that can go wrong will lead to a
> > segfault which isn't fun to
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:44 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 17, 12:56 pm, mhampton wrote:
>> On Jan 17, 8:36 am, mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> > But the code certainly needs prettying up, i.e. I couldn't find a test
>> > suite, the files were all dumped in the same directory and on and on.
>
On Jan 17, 12:56 pm, mhampton wrote:
> On Jan 17, 8:36 am, mabshoff wrote:
Hi,
> > But the code certainly needs prettying up, i.e. I couldn't find a test
> > suite, the files were all dumped in the same directory and on and on.
> > If upstream is interested I could certainly make some sugges
On Jan 17, 12:48 pm, luis wrote:
> Mabshoff, William,
Hi,
> Yes, enforcing the use of the original compiler (/usr/bin/gcc)
> the "flint" compilation problem disappears.
Ok, but I am still curious why this fails for you with the other
compiler. Having compiled Sage with self compiled gcc 4.
I would be glad to have standard functions for triangulations!
Andrey
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, vis
William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>> On Jan 17, 2009, at 6:54 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>>
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: Yann Laigle-Chapuy
>>> Date: Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 4:06 AM
>>> Subject: [Sage Bug Report] or not?
>>> To: Mich
On Jan 17, 8:36 am, mabshoff wrote:
> But the code certainly needs prettying up, i.e. I couldn't find a test
> suite, the files were all dumped in the same directory and on and on.
> If upstream is interested I could certainly make some suggestions.
I don't think for such a small program that t
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
>
> On Jan 17, 2009, at 6:54 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Yann Laigle-Chapuy
>> Date: Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 4:06 AM
>> Subject: [Sage Bug Report] or not?
>> To: Michael Abshoff < SNIP >
>>
>>
>>
Mabshoff, William,
Yes, enforcing the use of the original compiler (/usr/bin/gcc)
the "flint" compilation problem disappears.
Thanks,
Luis
On Jan 17, 9:41 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:42 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > On Jan 17, 11:34 am, luis wrote:
> >> Hi,
>
> >>
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:42 AM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 17, 11:34 am, luis wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In compiling sage on a linux debian (stable) I have a problem
>> with "flint-1.0.13.p0".
>>
>> Some lines of the install.log file are included hereafter.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Luis
>
>
>
>> Fin
David Joyner writes:
> (d) Email someone to ask for an immediate quick review. I can try
> myself or maybe Martin Rubey or Simon King can?
I won't be able to do that, because I cannot build sage anymore. My computer
has become too old for sage, sorry.
Martin
--~--~-~--~~
On Jan 17, 11:34 am, luis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In compiling sage on a linux debian (stable) I have a problem
> with "flint-1.0.13.p0".
>
> Some lines of the install.log file are included hereafter.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Luis
> Finished extraction
>
Hi,
In compiling sage on a linux debian (stable) I have a problem
with "flint-1.0.13.p0".
Some lines of the install.log file are included hereafter.
Thanks,
Luis
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/luis/Desktop/sage-3.2.1/spkg'
sage-spkg flint-1.0.13.p0 2>&1
You must set the SAGE_ROOT environ
On Jan 17, 2009, at 6:54 AM, mabshoff wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Yann Laigle-Chapuy
> Date: Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 4:06 AM
> Subject: [Sage Bug Report] or not?
> To: Michael Abshoff < SNIP >
>
>
> Hi,
> is the following a feature or a bug?
>
> sage: 0*log(0)
> ...
> V
On Jan 17, 2009, at 5:45 AM, mhampton wrote:
> Currently Phcpack is an optional package for sage. Its main purpose
> is to numerically compute isolated solutions of polynomial systems,
> although it has some other functionality as well (e.g. computing mixed
> volumes, witness sets for higher-dim
On Jan 17, 10:31 am, David Joyner wrote:
> Given your time constraints and the problems you mentioned,
> what I would do is the following (though possibly Michael might
> recommend something else):
>
> (a) apply to a clone of the most recent version of Sage the
> changes you want (including tho
Given your time constraints and the problems you mentioned,
what I would do is the following (though possibly Michael might
recommend something else):
(a) apply to a clone of the most recent version of Sage the
changes you want (including those of M Hansen)
"manually",
(b) create a new "big" pat
David,
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4036
Does not apply cleanly to recent source versions of Sage. It says:
[...,needs rebase]
How do I do that? It is not hard to manually fix the mismatches in the
old patches, but what does it mean to "re-base"?
The existing tests pass, but I am
Dear Bill,
On 17 Jan., 18:28, Bill Page wrote:
...
> ... :-) But I don't understand. Haven't I reviewed them many times
> here already?
Ticket #4633 is, as much as I see, your code. Therefore, someone else
must review it (obviously, in a peer review system one can not be
referee for one's own c
I think roughly speaking what Michael is referring to is to ask you to:
(a) apply the patches at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4036
to the latest version of Sage
(b) see if it applies cleanly, see if the tests pass, see if you find
problems in the code or docstrings. Assume for simpli
Michael,
In an email list usually it doesn't hurt much to point out the obvious
... :-) But I don't understand. Haven't I reviewed them many times
here already? Perhaps I just don't understand the process... Overall
there does not seem to be very much interest in the fricas package for
Sage, so I
On Jan 17, 8:56 am, Bill Page wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:30 AM, luis wrote:
Hi Bill,
> If you still have questions, please ask... And also try to encourage
> the Sage/FriCAS developers to review this ticket so that we can
> finally get it into Sage! :-)
I don't want to point out t
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:30 AM, luis wrote:
> Bill,
>
> Thanks again. Yes, this is exactly the kind of thing I want to
> do.
>
> A couple of questions:
>
> - Can you give me a small example in using axiom directely?
> (I mean without passing through sage).
Sure, no problem. Try something like
Luis,
Now that I have had some coffee, let me also give you a slightly
better example :-)
sage: LambdaK=axiom('CliffordAlgebra(4,Fraction Polynomial
Integer,quadraticForm diagonalMatrix [0,0,0,0])')
sage: e1=axiom('e(1)$%s'%(LambdaK.name()))
sage: e2=axiom('e(2)$%s'%(LambdaK.name()))
sage: e3=ax
Luis,
I get:
sage: ...
sage: a=3*e2*e1 + 4*e1
sage: a
2
4x e - 3x e e
1 1 2
---
I notice you are using sage-3.1.4. That should be fine. In the example
above I am using 3.1.3 but it includes the patches done by Mike Hansen
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yann Laigle-Chapuy
Date: Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 4:06 AM
Subject: [Sage Bug Report] or not?
To: Michael Abshoff < SNIP >
Hi,
is the following a feature or a bug?
sage: 0*log(0)
...
ValueError: self must be positive
ok, but
sage: f=x*log(x)
sage:
On Jan 17, 6:17 am, mhampton wrote:
Hi,
> I would like a vote on including the lrs optional package as a
> standard package in Sage.
>
> lrs stands for linear reverse search, an algorithm for computing
> convex hulls which is quite different from that of cddlib (which is
> already in Sage).
I would like a vote on including the lrs optional package as a
standard package in Sage.
lrs stands for linear reverse search, an algorithm for computing
convex hulls which is quite different from that of cddlib (which is
already in Sage). You can read about the algorithm and initial
implementat
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:45 AM, luis wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to make a relatively simple (but cumbersome)
> symbolic calculation in exterior algebra (more precisely in
> \Lambda^{k}(R^{n})).
> One possibility would be to use the Clifford algebra
> Cl(R^{n}, Q=0).
> Do you know if the
Currently Phcpack is an optional package for sage. Its main purpose
is to numerically compute isolated solutions of polynomial systems,
although it has some other functionality as well (e.g. computing mixed
volumes, witness sets for higher-dimensional solution components).
I have wanted Phcpack
Sage contains sympy and there is this:
http://wiki.sympy.org/wiki/Geometric_Algebra_Module
If that does what you want, you might want to ask about it on
the sympy list: http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en
since I not sure if the author subscribes to this list.
Sage contains Maxima and there
Hello,
I would like to make a relatively simple (but cumbersome) symbolic
calculation in exterior algebra (more precisely in \Lambda^{k}(R^
{n})).
One possibility would be to use the Clifford algebra Cl(R^{n}, Q=0).
Do you know if there is something in "Sage" appropriate to make this
kind of cal
32 matches
Mail list logo
