Dear Sage developers,
The 10th Libre Software Meeting will be in Nantes this year
(www.rmll.info, July 7-10th). As usual, my father will be holding a
booth on software for science in the education "village".
Sage is among the software he will be presenting (surprise :-))
Suggestions of d
> PS 1: a personal point of view for the reviewers: the new category
> code is certainly far from perfect. Yet, I think the reviewing goal
> should concentrate on making sure that the Sage rules are satisfied
> (100% doctests, ...) and that there is no complete show stopper. I am
> eagerly lookin
Dear David, dear Sage(-Combinat) devs
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 08:58:34AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> For the moment, the patches apply on 4.0 and 4.0.1. I am compiling
> 4.0.2 now, and will rebase the patches on Monday at the latest.
Done.
For the first time in a long while, rebasing
Hi Martin,
Very nice! It's been on my Sage to-do list for some time to attempt
something similar for the wiki or the developer's guide. At a
minimum, I hope this presentation can get a pointer from the wiki
(once its completed) from someplace other than just the SD16 pages.
Some suggestions:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 9:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Gonzalo
> Tornaria wrote:
>> At some point in time, Sage included code which was GPLv2 only.
>> Authors were requested to extend their license to be GPLv2+, to allow
>> the choice of the GPLv3. It seems fair
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Rob Beezer wrote:
>
> Ondrej,
>
> I believe the tools you want are
>
> sage -coverage
> sage -coverageall
Yes, thanks! It's in local/bin/sage-coverage. Here is an example:
$ sage -coverage devel/sage/sage/calculus/calculus.py
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Martin
Albrecht wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
> development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/talks/sagedev.pdf
>
> It st
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> one of the rule for getting code into Sage is 100% doctesting --- what
> does it mean exactly?
> At least one doctest per function/method?
Yes.
> Is there some tool to check
> that?
Yes.
> I think I remember there was some scr
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Gonzalo
Tornaria wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:54 AM, William Stein wrote:
>> Does anybody who cares a lot have a strong opinion on whether Sage
>> should start allowing in new libraries that are licensed GPLv3+? If
>> so, why? Please, no flamebait, unle
Ondrej,
I believe the tools you want are
sage -coverage
sage -coverageall
which you can find again listed when you do
sage -advanced
Rob
On Jun 21, 4:41 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Hi,
>
> one of the rule for getting code into Sage is 100% doctesting --- what
> does it mean exactly?
> At le
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:54 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Does anybody who cares a lot have a strong opinion on whether Sage
> should start allowing in new libraries that are licensed GPLv3+? If
> so, why? Please, no flamebait, unless you post only to the
> sage-flame mailing list http://groups.
Hi,
one of the rule for getting code into Sage is 100% doctesting --- what
does it mean exactly?
At least one doctest per function/method? Is there some tool to check
that? I think I remember there was some script for it, but I can't
find it now.
However, at least to me, just one doctest per fun
Hi Martin,
On 6/22/09, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
> development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
>
>http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/talks/sagedev.pdf
>
> It still seem
I liked it:-) Great job!
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Martin
Albrecht wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
> development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/ta
Hi,
as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is at:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/talks/sagedev.pdf
It still seems rather dull to be honest. I'd appreciate any input.
Cheers,
The spkg also works on a Fedora 11, x86_64 box.
regards
john perry
On Jun 20, 11:13 am, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> Final update on my Arch Linux current try - with #6362 "all tests passed"!
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > small update - build finishe
William Stein wrote:
> 2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby :
>> In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
>> consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
>>
>> -rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby 1093 17194
Hi Georg,
> The root cause was the patch for trac #2513 which was incorporated in
> Sage-4.0.2.alpha4, concerning the setting (or not ...) of the variable
> LANG in the sage-env script.
>
> I'll prepare a nice patch with some explanations for the R.spkg's
> "spkg-install" script to use 'LANG="en_
2009/6/21 William Stein :
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, gsw wrote:
>>
>> Hi John,
>>
>> On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona wrote:
>>> This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
>>> precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
>>> Alex Ghitza). Ot
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> I downloaded the ATLAS source code from sourceforge, built, tested and
> installed that with no problem at all. However, I note it only maked
> static libraries, not shared libraries on my Sun Blade 2000.
I would add, building, testing, *tuning* and installing ATLAS f
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, gsw wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona wrote:
>> This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
>> precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
>> Alex Ghitza). Others can move on.
>>
>> In the conver
When I tried to build Sage on my Blade 2000 with gcc 4.4.0 configured to
use the Sun linker, so it failed to build, when building ATLAS.
make[3]: Entering directory
`/export/home/drkirkby/sage/sage-4.0.2/spkg/build/atlas-3.8.3.p3/ATLAS-build/lib'
ld -shared -soname libatlas.so -o libatlas.so
Hi John,
On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona wrote:
> This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
> precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
> Alex Ghitza). Others can move on.
>
> In the conversion of a pari complex number back to Sage (in
> sage/li
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
>> Let's set up a regular time frame to publicly revisit the Sage
>> licensing, say in yearly intervals.
>
> I believe that other projects have had difficulty tracking down people
> who contributed code in the past when trying to deal with l
> Let's set up a regular time frame to publicly revisit the Sage
> licensing, say in yearly intervals.
I believe that other projects have had difficulty tracking down people
who contributed code in the past when trying to deal with licensing
issues. Why is our project different?
Nick
--~--
This should be of interest to anyone who has ever had to manage
precision issues between Sage and pari real and complex numbers (e.g.
Alex Ghitza). Others can move on.
In the conversion of a pari complex number back to Sage (in
sage/libs/pari/gen_py.py in the function python(z)), the precision
2009/6/21 gsw :
>
>
>
> On 21 Jun., 15:54, William Stein wrote:
>> 2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune :
>>
>>
>>
>> > I quote from
>>
>> > http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
>>
>> > which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
>> > requirement is written a
I just looked at the release notes for NTL 5.5
(http://www.shoup.net/ntl/doc/tour-changes.html). There are only two
things. One is fixing gmp's xgcd function (which should not matter to
Sage since Sage now uses mpir and not gmp, right? and wasn't that
very thing one reason for the gmp/mpir spli
On 21 Jun., 15:37, William Stein wrote:
> 2009/6/21 gsw :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 21 Jun., 08:28, Simon King wrote:
> >> Dear all,
>
> >> athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/5343...
> >> I was asking about the apparently changed behaviour of "sage -t".
> >> Georg sugges
On 21 Jun., 15:54, William Stein wrote:
> 2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune :
>
>
>
> > I quote from
>
> > http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
>
> > which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
> > requirement is written as:
>
> > "The license must be a
William Stein wrote:
> 2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby :
>> In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
>> consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
>>
>> -rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
>> -rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby 1093 17194
On 19 Jun., 08:28, gsw wrote:
> > I checked back for the my Sage-4.0.1 Intel Mac OS X 10.4 build and
> > unfortunately yes, this problem is there, too --- so the currently
> > bdist'ed version is flawed :-/
> > I don't seem to have my Sage-4.0 logs anymore, but I found those for
> > Sage-3.4.2,
2009/6/20 Golam Mortuza Hossain :
>
> Hi,
>
> It seems that there is a major bug in new symbolics simplify()
> method involving "D" and symbolic function (Sage-4.0.1).
>
> ---
> sage: f(x) = function('f',x)
> sage: f(-x).diff(x)
> -D[0](f)(-x)
> sage: f(-x).diff(x).simplify()
> -D[0](f)(x)
2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune :
>
> I quote from
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
>
> which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
> requirement is written as:
>
> "The license must be a GPL version 2+ compatible license. (This will
> be publicl
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby :
>
> In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
> consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
>
> -rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
> -rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby 1093 17194 May 11 2008 mfile
>
> As
In the patches directory of ntl-5.4.2.p7 there are two files which I'd
consider makefiles (i.e. make would understand them)
-rw-r- 1 kirkby 1093 443 Mar 24 2008 ntl_makefile
-rw-r--r-- 1 kirkby 1093 17194 May 11 2008 mfile
As you can see from the file sizes, there ar
I quote from
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
which is about the inclusion procedure for new packages. The first
requirement is written as:
"The license must be a GPL version 2+ compatible license. (This will
be publicly revisited around Jan 15, 2009.)"
Whatever was dec
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby :
>
> Title pretty much says it all.
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/
>
> says "Download 4.0.1"
>
> following the links and one finds a link to
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/src/sage-4.0.2.tar
>
> Easy to fix I guess.
>
This is *on purpose*. We don't update the ma
2009/6/21 gsw :
>
>
>
> On 21 Jun., 08:28, Simon King wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/5343...
>> I was asking about the apparently changed behaviour of "sage -t".
>> Georg suggested to move the discussion to sage-devel, so, here it
>> i
2009/6/21 Dr. David Kirkby :
>
> Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>> Before building gcc 4.4.0 on 't2' I needed to build mpfr, as it is
>> perquisite for gcc.
>>
>> I built the latest version of mpfr (2.4.1) using the Sun supplied gcc
>> 3.4.2 in /usr/sfw/bin. mpfr built and passed all 148 tests.
>>
>>
>>
I just found this one:
http://fr2.rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/mandriva/devel/cooker/i586/media/contrib/testing/sagemath-4.0.1-4mdv2010.0.i586.html
H
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, s
2009/6/21 Harald Schilly :
>
> I just found this one:
> http://fr2.rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/mandriva/devel/cooker/i586/media/contrib/testing/sagemath-4.0.1-4mdv2010.0.i586.html
>
> H
Nice. Can anybody test it? I would, but I already did my penance
having to use RPM based Linux distros, and don't
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> Before building gcc 4.4.0 on 't2' I needed to build mpfr, as it is
> perquisite for gcc.
>
> I built the latest version of mpfr (2.4.1) using the Sun supplied gcc
> 3.4.2 in /usr/sfw/bin. mpfr built and passed all 148 tests.
>
>
> With the aid:
>
> 1) The aid of a p
On 21 Jun., 08:28, Simon King wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> athttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/5343...
> I was asking about the apparently changed behaviour of "sage -t".
> Georg suggested to move the discussion to sage-devel, so, here it
> is...
>
> On 20 Jun., 22:10,
Title pretty much says it all.
http://www.sagemath.org/
says "Download 4.0.1"
following the links and one finds a link to
http://sage.math.washington.edu/sage/src/sage-4.0.2.tar
Easy to fix I guess.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sa
45 matches
Mail list logo
