> Sure! In sage-build.el, find the line (comint-send-eof) (in defun
> rerun-sage ()) and repeat it a few times. I've folded this in but
> won't be cutting a new release until I have some more time or emacs
> frustrations.
Curious: this seems to make sage build and rerun hang on my machine.
B
On 21-Apr-09, at 5:11 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> Dear Nick,
>
> One more feature request for M-x rerun-sage
>
> More often than not when I rerun-sage, I am at an ipdb> prompt.
> Currently the soft kill (which is much faster than the hard kill!)
> does not work in that case. Could the
On Apr 23, 10:57 pm, Tim Abbott wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
> > I doubt this will ever happen. Soon for example we plan to switch to
> > the svn version of pari which absolutely changes lots of things in
> > Sage in non-backward compatible ways, so you cannot use the stable
>
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
> Sure, NTL might not be the best example here, but say matplotlib. We
> did not update to an svn release to make life harder for you, but
> because we needed a patch that was upstreamed and not easily
> rebasable. I think all the issue can and will be sorted
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
> I doubt this will ever happen. Soon for example we plan to switch to
> the svn version of pari which absolutely changes lots of things in
> Sage in non-backward compatible ways, so you cannot use the stable
> pari release with Sage any more. And given the ti
On Apr 23, 10:34 pm, Tim Abbott wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
Hi Tim,
> > Another thing: In 3.4.1 we downgraded GAP to 4.4.10 from 4.4.12 that
> > was upgraded in Sage 3.3 due to a significant number of bugs and
> > issues in GAP 4.4.12. How would you deal with something like
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
> Another thing: In 3.4.1 we downgraded GAP to 4.4.10 from 4.4.12 that
> was upgraded in Sage 3.3 due to a significant number of bugs and
> issues in GAP 4.4.12. How would you deal with something like that in
> the packaged version of Sage? The whole point abo
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, William Stein wrote:
> >> What do people think about this proposal?
>
> -1 from me as a goal for 4.0, since we already have a very daunting
> challenge to accomplish the current goals for 4.0 in the timeframe we
> have set, unless of course you are volunteering to do all of
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Gonzalo Tornaria wrote:
> would it make sense to have a small "sage-source" debian package which
> depends on the (few) build tools required to build debian and which
> upon installation downloads sage, compiles it, and places it in a
> (debian specific) standard place in the
On Apr 23, 9:34 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
> Carl Witty wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Jason Grout
> > wrote:
> >> Anyone know where the CSS file is? The color is set in a default.css
> >> file, but the only default.css files I see are in _static directories,
> >> which sounds like t
Carl Witty wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> Anyone know where the CSS file is? The color is set in a default.css
>> file, but the only default.css files I see are in _static directories,
>> which sounds like they are automatically generated somehow.
>
> It comes
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> Anyone know where the CSS file is? The color is set in a default.css
> file, but the only default.css files I see are in _static directories,
> which sounds like they are automatically generated somehow.
It comes (originally) from src/sphinx
William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On a different note, can we change the background color of examples? In
>> my opinion, that green is just a bit too strong.
>
> It's not green, it is grey, and I also really don't like it either.
It's definitely a light green for me in firefox on ubuntu (it's color
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
> chris wuthrich wrote:
>>
>> i have some questions and suggestion on the RestructuredText. I am a
>> ReST-newbie and so maybe these things have been discussed before.
>>
>> * In one of my files i have a line "power_series = series". This
>>
chris wuthrich wrote:
>
> i have some questions and suggestion on the RestructuredText. I am a
> ReST-newbie and so maybe these things have been discussed before.
>
> * In one of my files i have a line "power_series = series". This
> produces the full docstring of series to appear twice in the
i have some questions and suggestion on the RestructuredText. I am a
ReST-newbie and so maybe these things have been discussed before.
* In one of my files i have a line "power_series = series". This
produces the full docstring of series to appear twice in the
documentation, once under series
On Apr 23, 5:51 am, "Georg S. Weber"
wrote:
> Hi Michael,
Hi Georg,
> probably you did. But just to be sure: did you really do tests with
> the singular spkg I put a while ago at
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/weberg/spkg/
> ?
Your spkg + sage -b to rebuild the extensions blow up
On Apr 23, 2:04 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:58 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> > I doubt this will ever happen. Soon for example we plan to switch to
> > the svn version of pari which absolutely changes lots of things in
> > Sage in non-backward compatible ways, so you cannot
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:58 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 23, 12:57 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:32 PM, David Roe wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> > +1 from me as a good goal for 4.0. But I don't have a whole lot of
>> > experience with dealing with spkgs, and I'll be workin
On Apr 23, 1:52 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:50 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> I think for the near term we should provide a binary tarball of your
> toolchain.
> I just tried dumping it on a completely different sparc box, and it works
> well.
They have been available sinc
On Apr 23, 12:57 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:32 PM, David Roe wrote:
Hi,
> > +1 from me as a good goal for 4.0. But I don't have a whole lot of
> > experience with dealing with spkgs, and I'll be working on improving
> > p-adics, so I probably won't be helping much
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:50 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 23, 6:23 am, "Dr. David Kirkby"
> wrote:
>> mabshoff wrote:
>> > Hello,
>
>
>> Hi Michael,
>
> Hi David,
>
>> As Sage on Solaris needs a custom tool chain, could a script be provided
>> that builds that tool chain from a full (but
On Apr 23, 6:23 am, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
> > Hello,
> Hi Michael,
Hi David,
> As Sage on Solaris needs a custom tool chain, could a script be provided
> that builds that tool chain from a full (but fresh) installation of the
> latest version of Solaris, which is Solar
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Tim Lahey wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 23, 2009, at 4:07 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
>>
>> Could you explain how assumptions are so important? Could you
We already discussed this many times on this list, just search the
archives. Without good assumptions, you cannot imple
Tim Abbott wrote:
>
> The first is upgrading CVS/SVN versions of dependencies to actual
> releases. I notice the Sage currently has an SVN version of jqueryui, an
> SVN version of matplotlib, and an SVN version of ghmm (to be fair, ghmm
> hasn't released is ages, so I don't blame Sage for tha
On Apr 23, 5:51 am, "Georg S. Weber"
wrote:
> Hi Michael,
Hi Georg,
> probably you did. But just to be sure: did you really do tests with
> the singular spkg I put a while ago at
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/weberg/spkg/
> ?
I will take it for a spin. I am pretty sure we need to
On Apr 23, 4:36 am, Flavio Coelho wrote:
> Thanks Michael,
Hi Flávio,
> I was really referring to multiprocessing, since their APIs are not
> the same and pyprocessing isn't supported anymore. Multiprocessing is
> maintained to be fully compatible with the 2.6 module to help with
> forward c
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:09 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> it would be good if you contributed a feature to Sage 3.4.1 to check
>> the release tour at
>>
>> http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-3.4.1
>>
>> and edit what is there already in case it can be im
On Apr 23, 2009, at 4:07 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> Could you explain how assumptions are so important? Could you
> particularly address how they can (1) be so critically important, and
> yet (2) ginac doesn't have them. Incidentaly, to me they are
> particularly important in symbolic integr
2009/4/23 Tim Abbott :
>
> I'd like to add as a goal that Sage 4.0 works with versions of its
> dependencies available from the relevant upstreams.
>
> For context, I would very much like to be able to package Sage 4.0 for
> Debian once it comes out, since I find the current state of having Sage
>
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
> Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Maurizio wrote:
We managed to get one gsoc project that does the assumptions right, so
it may happen anyways over the summer, in fact I very much hope so.
>>> How does
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:32 PM, David Roe wrote:
> +1 from me as a good goal for 4.0. But I don't have a whole lot of
> experience with dealing with spkgs, and I'll be working on improving
> p-adics, so I probably won't be helping much.
> David
>
> 2009/4/23 Tim Abbott
>>
>> I'd like to add a
Ondrej Certik wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Maurizio wrote:
>>> We managed to get one gsoc project that does the assumptions right, so
>>> it may happen anyways over the summer, in fact I very much hope so.
>>>
>> How does assumptions affect this? If that's so important, you should
>>
+1 from me as a good goal for 4.0. But I don't have a whole lot of
experience with dealing with spkgs, and I'll be working on improving
p-adics, so I probably won't be helping much.
David
2009/4/23 Tim Abbott
>
> I'd like to add as a goal that Sage 4.0 works with versions of its
> dependencies
I'd like to add as a goal that Sage 4.0 works with versions of its
dependencies available from the relevant upstreams.
For context, I would very much like to be able to package Sage 4.0 for
Debian once it comes out, since I find the current state of having Sage
3.0.5 from last July to be somew
The latest RC of MPIR 1.1.1 should fix this issue.
Bill.
On 23 Apr, 01:43, Bill Hart wrote:
> Hi Marshall. I think I have a fix for this. But I've started a thread
> on the MPIR development list for this:
>
> http://groups.google.co.uk/group/mpir-devel/browse_thread/thread/34a4...
>
> Bill.
>
>
mabshoff wrote:
> Hello,
>
> while there should be a quick 3.4.2 to mop up patches from trac before
> the big 4.0 jump today we had a planning session during the UW status
> meeting about the goals for Sage 4.0. The result is at
>
>http://wiki.sagemath.org/plan/sage-4.0
>
> It still needs a
Hi Michael,
probably you did. But just to be sure: did you really do tests with
the singular spkg I put a while ago at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/weberg/spkg/
?
There are quite some changes in it (ask me if you have specific
questions), one or the other of which might possibly help.
Hello,
this seems to be more than jmol...
O3D is an open-source web API for creating rich, interactive 3D
applications in the browser. This API is shared at an early stage as
part of a conversation with the broader developer community about
establishing an open web standard for 3D graphics.
--
Thanks Michael,
I was really referring to multiprocessing, since their APIs are not
the same and pyprocessing isn't supported anymore. Multiprocessing is
maintained to be fully compatible with the 2.6 module to help with
forward compatibility.
So I guess the answer to my question is that Multip
On Apr 23, 2009, at 1:51 AM, Kwankyu wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> Thank you. I just found examples in the reference using multivariate
> quotient rings.
>
> May I ask a similar question about hermite normal form of matrices
> over univariate polynomial ring? ^^
Don't think it's implemented yet, but y
Hi folks,
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:09 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> it would be good if you contributed a feature to Sage 3.4.1 to check
> the release tour at
>
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-3.4.1
>
> and edit what is there already in case it can be improved or add
> something in ca
2009/4/23 John Cremona :
> 2009/4/22 mabshoff :
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 22, 12:54 pm, "David M. Monarres" wrote:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>>> On an upgrade from 3.4 on Mac OS X 10.5.6 (intel) I get the following
>>> doctest errors:
>>
>> Thanks for the build report.
>>
>>> The following tests failed:
>>>
>>
2009/4/22 mabshoff :
>
>
>
> On Apr 22, 12:54 pm, "David M. Monarres" wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
>> On an upgrade from 3.4 on Mac OS X 10.5.6 (intel) I get the following
>> doctest errors:
>
> Thanks for the build report.
>
>> The following tests failed:
>>
>> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/algebr
Hi Robert,
Thank you. I just found examples in the reference using multivariate
quotient rings.
May I ask a similar question about hermite normal form of matrices
over univariate polynomial ring? ^^
Kwankyu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email
On Apr 23, 2009, at 1:04 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just discovered:
>
> http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/
>
> watch the video there. I think this is awesome -- I hope sooner or
> later all major browsers implement something like this, then it could
> be used for all kinds of 3d interact
On Apr 23, 2009, at 1:29 AM, Kwankyu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems that multivariate polynomial quotient rings are not in Sage
> yet. Is someone working to fill this gap? or should I rely on Singular
> or Magma interface? or should I attempt to implement my own toyish
> one? Give me an advice. Thank
On Apr 23, 1:04 am, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> I just discovered:
>
> http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/
>
> watch the video there. I think this is awesome -- I hope sooner or
> later all major browsers implement something like this, then it could
> be used for all kinds of 3d interaction
On Apr 23, 1:22 am, Martin Albrecht
wrote:
> On Thursday 23 April 2009, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > Hello,
Hi Martin,
> > while there should be a quick 3.4.2 to mop up patches from trac before
> > the big 4.0 jump today we had a planning session during the UW status
> > meeting about the goals for
Hi,
It seems that multivariate polynomial quotient rings are not in Sage
yet. Is someone working to fill this gap? or should I rely on Singular
or Magma interface? or should I attempt to implement my own toyish
one? Give me an advice. Thank you.
Kwankyu
--~--~-~--~~~-
2009/4/22 mabshoff :
>
>
>
> On Apr 22, 12:52 pm, Nick Alexander wrote:
>> >> To override this in Firefox on Linux, I put
>>
>> >> #content.ticket { width: 100% !important; }
>>
>> > Hmm, that seems to be a worthwhile change to me since these days most
>> > people should not be limited by 800x600
On Thursday 23 April 2009, mabshoff wrote:
> Hello,
>
> while there should be a quick 3.4.2 to mop up patches from trac before
> the big 4.0 jump today we had a planning session during the UW status
> meeting about the goals for Sage 4.0. The result is at
>
>http://wiki.sagemath.org/plan/sage-
Hi,
I just discovered:
http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/
watch the video there. I think this is awesome -- I hope sooner or
later all major browsers implement something like this, then it could
be used for all kinds of 3d interaction in the notebook.
Ondrej
--~--~-~--~~
53 matches
Mail list logo
