On Apr 19, 11:29 pm, Mike Cripps wrote:
> Hi Michael
Hi Mike,
> > Oops, I meant if the /proc/cpuinfo from the "inside" of the Xen
> > machine in case the above wasn't it already. I am also wondering if
> > the kernel is 32 or 64 bit since I am not sure what the virtulization
> > does kernel
Hi Michael
>
> > Could you post the output from /proc/cpuinfo please?
>
> Oops, I meant if the /proc/cpuinfo from the "inside" of the Xen
> machine in case the above wasn't it already. I am also wondering if
> the kernel is 32 or 64 bit since I am not sure what the virtulization
> does kernel wis
On Apr 19, 10:47 pm, mabshoff wrote:
> On Apr 19, 8:55 am, Mike Cripps wrote:
>
> Hi Mike,
> Could you post the output from /proc/cpuinfo please?
Oops, I meant if the /proc/cpuinfo from the "inside" of the Xen
machine in case the above wasn't it already. I am also wondering if
the kernel i
On Apr 19, 8:55 am, Mike Cripps wrote:
Hi Mike,
> Apologies - I have tar gzipped the install log file and it is at:
>
> http://www.irreverence.ath.cx/install.log.tar.gz(size is approx
> 116kB)
>
> I am concerned about Bill Hart's suggestion that my machine could
> believe it is 32bit - will t
Hi Luis,
please open a trac ticket since Jon did not respond yet and post the
patch there. I talked to Gonzalo in IRC today and he mentioned that he
also had a bug fix, but he wanted to give you a chance to post a patch
first.
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 3:28 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Ondrej,
>
> How does sympy compute the integral of
>
> (x^2 + 2*x + 1 +
> (3*x+1)*sqrt(x+log(x)))/(x*sqrt(x+log(x))*(x+sqrt(x+log(x?
See this thread in our list:
http://groups.google.com/group/sympy/browse_thread/thread/9a61d681e6f96
On Apr 19, 5:14 pm, mabshoff wrote:
> On Apr 19, 1:01 am, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> > * #5806: Sage 3.4.1.rc3: failing test "devel/sage/sage/misc/
> > sagedoc.py"
>
> Ok, it seems that there is no movement on that ticket yet. So unless
> something pops up in the next hour or so this file will be
Florent,
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Florent Hivert
wrote:
> As you know I have access to such a core 2 quad, and I'm constantly bitten by
> this pexpect issue. So I tried this ticket. It doesn't seems to work for me:
Can you run tests several times and see if the timeouts are always in
t
On Apr 19, 1:01 am, mabshoff wrote:
> * #5806: Sage 3.4.1.rc3: failing test "devel/sage/sage/misc/
> sagedoc.py"
Ok, it seems that there is no movement on that ticket yet. So unless
something pops up in the next hour or so this file will be "nodoctest"
in 3.4.1 :(
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~-
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 4:20 PM, root wrote:
>
>> So we have a good start to implement the Risch algorithm in sympy already.
>
> Ondrej, what result do you get for:
>
> integrate(sqrt(x+log(x)),x)
In [1]: integrate(sqrt(x+log(x)),x)
Out[1]:
⌠
⎮
⎮ ╲╱ x + log(x) dx
⌡
So we can't
> > A much shorter example is:
> >
> > integrate(sqrt(x+log(x)),x)
> >
> > to which Axiom replies:
> >
> > integrate: implementation incomplete (constant residues)
> >
>
> What is f(x) = sqrt(x+log(x)) supposed to be an example of? Does f
> has an antiderivative that can be expressed in terms of
> So we have a good start to implement the Risch algorithm in sympy already.
Ondrej, what result do you get for:
integrate(sqrt(x+log(x)),x)
Tim
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this grou
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Fredrik Johansson
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>> Wikipedia also has a few interesting remarks, e.g., that the Risch
>>> algorithm isn't an algorithm, because it
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Fredrik Johansson
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> Wikipedia also has a few interesting remarks, e.g., that the Risch
>> algorithm isn't an algorithm, because it depends on being able to
>> check equality of general elementary
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 3:33 PM, root wrote:
>
>> > Wikipedia also has a few interesting remarks, e.g., that the Risch
>> > algorithm isn't an algorithm, because it depends on being able to
>> > check equality of general elementary functions, which is evidently an
>> > open problem in general (so
> > Wikipedia also has a few interesting remarks, e.g., that the Risch
> > algorithm isn't an algorithm, because it depends on being able to
> > check equality of general elementary functions, which is evidently an
> > open problem in general (so in practice you just fake it by evaluating
> > nume
> > Wikipedia also has a few interesting remarks, e.g., that the Risch
> > algorithm isn't an algorithm, because it depends on being able to
> > check equality of general elementary functions, which is evidently an
> > open problem in general (so in practice you just fake it by evaluating
> > nume
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Wikipedia also has a few interesting remarks, e.g., that the Risch
> algorithm isn't an algorithm, because it depends on being able to
> check equality of general elementary functions, which is evidently an
> open problem in general (so in
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Carl Witty wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Maurizio wrote:
>> Carl, I took advantage of your suggestion, even though I assume I
>> can't still go through the whole process with the current gcd
>> capabilities in Pynac. But before than that, I'd like
On Apr 19, 10:28 am, "Georg S. Weber"
wrote:
> On 19 Apr., 18:29, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > On Apr 19, 8:07 am, Florent Hivert
> > wrote:
>
> > > Dear Michael,
>
> > Hi Florent,
>
> > > Am I doing something wrong ? Or am I just giving a bad news ?
>
> > As mentioned on the ticket in the l
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Maurizio wrote:
> Carl, I took advantage of your suggestion, even though I assume I
> can't still go through the whole process with the current gcd
> capabilities in Pynac. But before than that, I'd like to point out
> something strange I did notice, and maybe als
On 19 Apr., 18:29, mabshoff wrote:
> On Apr 19, 8:07 am, Florent Hivert
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Michael,
>
> Hi Florent,
>
> > Am I doing something wrong ? Or am I just giving a bad news ?
>
> As mentioned on the ticket in the last two comments you need the spkgs
> from #5823 for the patch
On Apr 19, 8:07 am, Florent Hivert
wrote:
> Dear Michael,
Hi Florent,
> Am I doing something wrong ? Or am I just giving a bad news ?
As mentioned on the ticket in the last two comments you need the spkgs
from #5823 for the patch to work.
> Cheers,
>
> Florent
Cheers,
Michael
--~-
Dear Michael,
> * #5662: Gonzalo Tonoria: Timing issue in clisp-readline (Nasty hang
> (deadlock?) in maxima pexpect interface on core 2 quad [Reviewed by
> Dan Drake]
> The 8th open ticket is a "maxima can't start up" problem and fixed by
> #5823 it seems. #5662 has a positive review, bu
Apologies - I have tar gzipped the install log file and it is at:
http://www.irreverence.ath.cx/install.log.tar.gz (size is approx
116kB)
I am concerned about Bill Hart's suggestion that my machine could
believe it is 32bit - will the install log file be sufficient to
determine if this is the ca
Challenging? Just because about the problem of integration in finite
terms Hardy in 1916 stated that “there is reason to suppose that no
such method can be given” ? :)
I want to add to this discussion that I found a lot of useful
information in this thread from SymPy list:
http://groups.google.co
It looks like the assembler is complaining because it is being asked
to compile a 64 bit program on a machine which it incorrectly believes
is 32 bits. We've seen a similar issue with MPIR, though the C
compiler there was pathcc not gcc. We decided the machine had probably
been set up incorrectly.
On Apr 19, 7:59 am, Mike Cripps wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Mike,
> I have been attempting to install Sage today from the source, and when
> I ran `make` I got the following output (after a lot of stuff compiled
> fine):
> ude -Wa,--noexecstack -g -O2 -MT mpih-add1-asm.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/
> mpih
Aha! Quite the challenge is it not?
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Maurizio wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> > Well, we just need a resultant algorithm that doesn't go through
> > Singular. I'm planning to write such a thing as part of my
> > cylindrical algebraic decomposition implementation sometime in
Yep, that's me!
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Mike Cripps wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have been attempting to install Sage today from the source, and when
> I ran `make` I got the following output (after a lot of stuff compiled
> fine):
>
> /bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H
“If smart people all had Ph.D.’s we would not have light bulbs.” –
Martin Musatov speaking on American Entrepeneur and Innovator Thomas
Edison
Preface: “Computational Complexity”
So much of what I have seen since I have began studying computational
complexity simply amazes me. I have come from
primegaps = {First[#], Last[#]} & /@ {{1, 2}, {2, 3}, {4, 7}, {6,
23}, {8, 89}, {14, 113}, {18, 523}, {20, 887}, {22, 1129}, {34,
1327}, {36, 9551}, {44, 15683}, {52, 19609}, {72, 31397}, {86,
155921}, {96, 360653}, {112, 370261}, {114, 492113}, {118,
1349533}, {132, 1357201},
Hi all,
I have been attempting to install Sage today from the source, and when
I ran `make` I got the following output (after a lot of stuff compiled
fine):
/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I../
src -I../
src -I/root/sage/sage-3.4/local/include -Wa,--noexecstack
My question is how do prime numbers play into ground level computational
programming? What is a "troll" and what is a "couch boy"? Why is there is so
much resistance from the community at large against establishment of
computational complexity, specifically the claim that [P=NP] seems to be a
parti
Nice! :)
On 19 Apr, 16:42, Pat LeSmithe wrote:
> In case there's interest... It's possible to embed any web page into an
> output cell with a bit of client-side mischief:
>
> http://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/464/
>
> Since this uses cell_div_output_*, the embeds won't respond to requests
> to hid
Hi all
> Well, we just need a resultant algorithm that doesn't go through
> Singular. I'm planning to write such a thing as part of my
> cylindrical algebraic decomposition implementation sometime in the
> next few months.
>
> Carl
yes, I agree with that.
William, unfortunately I can't underst
In case there's interest... It's possible to embed any web page into an
output cell with a bit of client-side mischief:
http://www.sagenb.org/home/pub/464/
Since this uses cell_div_output_*, the embeds won't respond to requests
to hide themselves or to delete all output. Perhaps it's better t
[I posted this accidentally in sage-support first, please reply here.
I would guess this indicates that I need to catch some sleep :)]
We are quite close to 3.4.1.rc4 and the remaining open tickets are at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/query?status=assigned&status=new&s...
The situation in
38 matches
Mail list logo
