On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:33 AM, Nicolas M.
Thiery wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:01:58AM -0400, David Roe wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery
>> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:29:34AM +0200, Franco Saliola wrote:
>> > > I'm also in favor of _test_
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:01:58AM -0400, David Roe wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery
> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:29:34AM +0200, Franco Saliola wrote:
> > > I'm also in favor of _test_X to avoid cluttering up the tab
> > > completion. Another opti
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Dr. David
Kirkby wrote:
>
> Mike Hansen wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Dr. David
>> Kirkby wrote:
>>> exp(-x^i).integral(x,0,1) returns
>>>
>>> Traceback (click to the left for traceback)
>>> ...
>>> Is %i an integer?
>>>
>>> Ouch! Any Sage comments?
On Jun 24, 2009, at 1:57 AM, Maurizio wrote:
>
> I agree. We could do something like plotting all the deltas with a
> stem plot and then superimposing the rest of the plot
>
> Maurizio
>
It might give the wrong impression.
> On 24 Giu, 04:21, David Roe wrote:
>> One way would be to have a ve
I agree. We could do something like plotting all the deltas with a
stem plot and then superimposing the rest of the plot
Maurizio
On 24 Giu, 04:21, David Roe wrote:
> One way would be to have a vertical ray that doesn't change the scaling of
> the rest of the graph (just goes to the top of the
Hi,
Video and slides for *all* the talks so far from Sage Days 16 are now
posted here:
http://wiki.sagemath.org/days16
William
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to th
Ok, I've switched to using /space, the RAM disk on geom, and things
are coming along *much* faster. I hope to have an alpha out in a few
hours. You can see a snippet of the output from sage -merge at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/boothby/releases/4.1/mergelog
I've suppressed the output
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 at 02:15AM +0100, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> I think we should really make some effort to improve our page on
> Wikipedia.
I'm not sure if I can really help with this, but I agree that
"cultivating" our Wikipedia page is necessary these days. It's not
entirely unlike how politic
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:29:34AM +0200, Franco Saliola wrote:
> > > I'm also in favor of _test_X to avoid cluttering up the tab
> > > completion. Another option to increase visibility would be to have a
> > > test object, e.g.
> > >
I just noticed that the following quiz problem I gave my students came
back nicer from Sage (i.e., maxima) and sympy than mathematica. Kudos
to you guys for having a better answer:
Mathematica 7.0 for Linux x86 (32-bit)
Copyright 1988-2008 Wolfram Research, Inc.
In[1]:= Integrate[Sin[x]^2*Cos
One way would be to have a vertical ray that doesn't change the scaling of
the rest of the graph (just goes to the top of the viewing window). Not
precisely accurate, but better than nothing.
David
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Tim Lahey wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Maurizio wro
Mike Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Dr. David
> Kirkby wrote:
>> exp(-x^i).integral(x,0,1) returns
>>
>> Traceback (click to the left for traceback)
>> ...
>> Is %i an integer?
>>
>> Ouch! Any Sage comments?
>
> This is just coming from Maxima:
>
> (%i3) integrate(exp(-x^(%i))
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Dr. David
Kirkby wrote:
> exp(-x^i).integral(x,0,1) returns
>
> Traceback (click to the left for traceback)
> ...
> Is %i an integer?
>
> Ouch! Any Sage comments?
This is just coming from Maxima:
(%i3) integrate(exp(-x^(%i)),x,0,1);
Is %i an integer?
--Mike
--
Some of you may be aware of Vladimir Bondarenko, who is an 'interesting'
character who can be very childish at times, but has written some
interesting software which can find faults with computer algebra systems.
He took a quick look at http://demo.sagenb.org/ as he could potentially
hook up h
I think we should really make some effort to improve our page on Wikipedia.
Comparing the Sage and Mathematica pages on Wikipedia shows the
Mathematica one is much nicer. Would it not be sensible to put some
effort into promoting Sage there? If it looks like the program is more
complete, one h
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Maurizio wrote:
>
> As a clarification of what I was talking about, see this:
>
> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ImpulsePair.html
>
> Regards
>
> Maurizio
How are they supposed to be plotted? Along with other impulses,
it would be fine, but next to any normal function
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:42:46 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:20 PM, kcrisman wrote:
> >
> >> So the conclusion is that we will go with the Mathematica style
> >> notation.
> >
> > Does that also apply to Golam's earlier comment
> >
> > (a) If we al
From the top README.txt
---
NOT SUPPORTED:
* FreeBSD
* Arch Linux
* Gentoo Linux
* Microsoft Windows (via Visual Studio C++)
* Microsoft Windows (via Cygwin)
We like all of the above operating systems, but j
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Dr. David
Kirkby wrote:
>
> According to the top level README.txt
>
> --
> NOT OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED, BUT NEARLY WORKS:
> PROCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM
> sparc Solaris 10 -- works fine (needs cus
According to the top level README.txt
--
NOT OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED, BUT NEARLY WORKS:
PROCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM
sparc Solaris 10 -- works fine (needs custom built gcc
toolchain)
x86_64 Solaris 10 -- must
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:16:46AM +0200, William Stein wrote:
> Regarding what we currently do, this is not something that is
> "convention emerging" or "standardization attempt". It's something
> that Michael Abshoff standardized on probably 8-10 months ago, and as
> far as I know strongly requ
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:37 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Tom Boothby wrote:
>>
>> Progress Report:
>>
>> I've gotten a massive response from reviewers, thank you all very
>> much! I'm using Craig Citro's new automerge script, which has both
>> made it very easy
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:29:34AM +0200, Franco Saliola wrote:
> > I'm also in favor of _test_X to avoid cluttering up the tab
> > completion. Another option to increase visibility would be to have a
> > test object, e.g.
> >
> > sage: foo.test.associativity()
> > True
>
> +1. I think it merges
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:45 PM, Maurizio wrote:
>
> Many kudos for this!
>
> Honestly, I don't actually know whether it means that much, but at
> this point I think that it could be useful for us to follow
> Mathematica in defining two different functions: Heaviside which is
> undefined in 0 and th
As a clarification of what I was talking about, see this:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ImpulsePair.html
Regards
Maurizio
On 23 Giu, 23:45, Maurizio wrote:
> Many kudos for this!
>
> Honestly, I don't actually know whether it means that much, but at
> this point I think that it could be useful
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> 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 -s
Many kudos for this!
Honestly, I don't actually know whether it means that much, but at
this point I think that it could be useful for us to follow
Mathematica in defining two different functions: Heaviside which is
undefined in 0 and that is defined as the function whose derivative is
the Dirac
+1 from me as well.
David
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:29 AM, Franco Saliola wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Robert
> Bradshaw wrote:
> >
> > On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:29:46AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jun
I have an old patch sitting around on trac that did this: #1795. If you
want to pick up from there, it fixes a lot of these problems.
David
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> On Jun 23, 12:49 am, David Roe wrote:
> > The problem is probably the space between "
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Golam Mortuza
Hossain wrote:
>
> Thanks David, Tim, Burcin!
>
> Correct me if I have missed your points. With your suggestions
> here is the new conventions for Heaviside and unit step
>
> (2) Heaviside:
>
> (a) represented as: "heaviside"
> (b) latex na
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:02:05 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>
> Thanks David, Tim, Burcin!
Thank you for all the effort.
> Correct me if I have missed your points. With your suggestions
> here is the new conventions for Heaviside and unit step
>
> (2) Heaviside:
>
> (a) represented
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Robert Miller wrote:
>>
>> print, think, print, think, print, think, fix
>>
>
> What is your debug "printing system"? I put print "1", print
> "2",relevant_data
>
> print "3", etc., and if I stick more d
Thanks David, Tim, Burcin!
Correct me if I have missed your points. With your suggestions
here is the new conventions for Heaviside and unit step
(2) Heaviside:
(a) represented as: "heaviside"
(b) latex name : "\theta"
(c) heaviside(0): will return symbolic expression "he
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Robert Miller wrote:
>
> print, think, print, think, print, think, fix
>
What is your debug "printing system"? I put print "1", print "2",relevant_data
print "3", etc., and if I stick more debugging between 2 and 3, I'll
put "print 2.5", etc. What is your sys
Hi Golam,
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:53:17 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
> I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
> for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
>
> My proposals are:
>
> (1) These generalized functions be included in a new module as
>
>
On Jun 23, 2009, at 11:59 AM, David Joyner wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Golam Mortuza Hossain > wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
> for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
>
> My proposals are:
>
> (1) These gene
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
> for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
>
> My proposals are:
>
> (1) These generalized functions be included in a new module as
>
> "s
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:29:53 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Burcin Erocal
> wrote:
> >> I am wondering whether there is any policy/framework
> >> for hooking-up a specialized integration code as a part
> >> of integration algorithm in new symbolic?
> >
On Sunday 21 June 2009, 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 seems
Hi,
I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
My proposals are:
(1) These generalized functions be included in a new module as
"sage.functions.generalized"
(2) Dirac delta:
(a) represented as: "dirac_del
2009/6/23 William Stein :
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>> Then we need conventions for followup patches on tickets (reviewer's
>> patches and the like). And a convention for whether the reviewer's
>> patch replaces the original (something all too easy to happen by
>> m
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
>> I am wondering whether there is any policy/framework
>> for hooking-up a specialized integration code as a part
>> of integration algorithm in new symbolic?
>
> There isn't any, yet. That should change this week though. :)
>
> I plan to mov
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM, John Cremona wrote:
> Then we need conventions for followup patches on tickets (reviewer's
> patches and the like). And a convention for whether the reviewer's
> patch replaces the original (something all too easy to happen by
> mistake when using MQs, at least fo
Just so that others can follow this discussion: could you post a
link or cut and paste some of your arguments against GPL v3?
I see how the difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3 may affect a
project like Java, but how does it matter for a project like SAGE? It
really seems to be a big deal to you
2009/6/23 William Stein :
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:36 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>>
>> That sounds quite sensible to me.
>
> What is "that"? It sounds below like you're basically arguing for
> what we currently do.
I wasn't very clear, sorry. I thought that Nicolas made some good
points but
I neither knew about search_def nor edit(). Thanks, I'll point them out both!
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99
_otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF
_www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb
_jab: martinralbre.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:36 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>
> That sounds quite sensible to me.
What is "that"? It sounds below like you're basically arguing for
what we currently do.
Regarding what we currently do, this is not something that is
"convention emerging" or "standardization attempt".
Hi,
The video for Sage Days 16 is all posted at http://wiki.sagemath.org/days16
William
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegr
2009/6/23 Robert Bradshaw :
>
> On Jun 21, 2009, at 12:54 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>
>> 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
That sounds quite sensible to me. Sometimes I make a patch before
opening a ticket, so the patch name does not have the ticket number on
it (e.g. #6386 opened yesterday). But it would not be a bad thing if
I had opened the ticket first (to indicate that I was working on it)
so that I would have
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Robert
Bradshaw wrote:
>
> On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:29:46AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 04:40:50PM +0200, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Nicolas M
Hi David,
On Jun 23, 12:49 am, David Roe wrote:
> The problem is probably the space between "ngens" and the parenthesis.
> David
I haven't read William's script, but that sounds like a good
explanation.
I thought about what my "building brick" for a "coverage" script can
and can't. As I said,
On 22 Jun., 11:25, Franco Saliola wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here is a quick description of what is below: Subclasses of Element
> complain that no sorting algorithm is defined even when all the rich
> comparison methods have been implemented. Bug?
>
> In the code sample below, C is a class that inher
53 matches
Mail list logo
