On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:00 PM, William Stein wrote:
> For
> example, right now we're having regular trouble with the trac server
> not being robust enough (IMHO). Spending a little money on somebody
> to fix this situation would make sense.
Just an update on this: Mike Hansen saw this and de
Hi!
I would like to see that in Sage too.
The combination of Gröbner bases and DPLL is very interesting (also
from a verification point of view).
I can only recommend to read the following paper.
C. Condrat and P. Kalla, "A Groebner Basis Approach to CNF formulae
Preprocessing"
I think, using Po
> From: William Stein
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:14:41 -0700
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:11 AM, John H Palmieri
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Anyway, 0^0 is undefined in math
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:51 PM, mhampton wrote:
>
> I have several times been in the position of being appointed
> treasurer, for various organizations, I think because I am often the
> "math person". The things I have learned are: I am not a very good
> treasurer, and organizational skills are
On Oct 22, 2009, at 4:45 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> Peter Jeremy wrote:
>> On 2009-Oct-16 13:05:02 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby" > > wrote:
>>> I'm updating a configure script which will warn users if their
>>> operating system
>>> is too old. In the case of a Solaris 9 machine it will say:
>>
On Oct 22, 2009, at 5:42 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> On Oct 22, 5:11 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> Well like it or not, it is a fact that 0.0^0.0 = 1 *is* the official
>> ISO 99 standard. Note that ISO = "international standards
>> organization".
>>
>> I'm not making an argument here for or ag
On Oct 22, 6:41 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:42 PM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
>
> I just mentioned "0^0" to my wife (a Biologist), and she instantly
> said "it doesn't exist".
We could conduct an experiment: survey the UW math department. It's a
little silly so I probab
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Bill Page wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:06 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> Can you try version 0.3.6?
>>
>> sage -i
>> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/patches/sagenb/sagenb-0.3.6.spkg
>>
>
> Much better! I have not been able to re-create the ed
Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sage: A=matrix(2,[1,2,3,3])
> sage: A.solve_right(vector([3,6]))
> (1, 1)
> sage: category(_)
> Category of elements of Vector space of dimension 2 over Rational
> Field
> sage: A.solve_left(vector([3,6]))
> [3 0]
> sage: category(_)
> Category of elements of Full Mat
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>
> I hope some expert confirm that this is a bug or merely my
> misunderstanding.
Yes, this looks like a bug to me.
William
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:42 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> On Oct 22, 5:11 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> Well like it or not, it is a fact that 0.0^0.0 = 1 *is* the official
>> ISO 99 standard. Note that ISO = "international standards
>> organization".
>>
>> I'm not making an argument here for o
> After running action Evaluate All, I choose some expression inside the
> worksheet and expected to make a small change to a constant and then
> re-evaluate it by hitting control-shift. The result was "NameError:
> name 'A' is not defined".
Of course I meant to write: "by hitting Shift-Enter"
-
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:06 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> Can you try version 0.3.6?
>
> sage -i
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/patches/sagenb/sagenb-0.3.6.spkg
>
Much better! I have not been able to re-create the edit problem I
reported earlier after about an hour of trying. How
This is an educated guess, but
5.x.0 x \leq 5
6.y.0 y \leq 8
7.z.0 z \leq 9
That's if Apple sticked to the naming scheme they claim to use
(http://lists.apple.com/archives/darwin-development/2001/Nov/msg00188.html
)
On 23/10/2009, at 2:18 PM, David Kirkby wrote:
> Do you know what versions a
I hope some expert confirm that this is a bug or merely my
misunderstanding.
Kwankyu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
On Oct 23, 12:11 am, John H Palmieri wrote:
> On Oct 22, 1:25 am, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>
> > Hi,
>
> > The following scares me.
>
> > sage: 0^0
> > 1
> > sage: F.=GF(5)
> > sage: F(0)^0
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> > ...
> > ArithmeticError: 0^0 is undefined.
>
> > For any x, x^0 is
2009/10/23 Michael Welsh :
>
> I would say anything strictly less than 8.0. There are versions
> missing from that table on Wikipedia.
> On 23/10/2009, at 1:45 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
>> If that is so, does it seem reasonable to display a message about
>> being
>> unsupported for Darwin vers
I would say anything strictly less than 8.0. There are versions
missing from that table on Wikipedia.
On 23/10/2009, at 1:45 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> If that is so, does it seem reasonable to display a message about
> being
> unsupported for Darwin versions 1.3.1, 1.4.1, 6.0.1 and 7.0 ?
I have several times been in the position of being appointed
treasurer, for various organizations, I think because I am often the
"math person". The things I have learned are: I am not a very good
treasurer, and organizational skills are much more important than math
skills for such a position.
William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
> wrote:
>> Michael Welsh wrote:
>>> 10.0.0 is current for darwin.
>>>
>>> Darwin numbers are different to OS X numbers.
>> So if 10.0.0 is current, what would be too old to be supported on Sage? I'm
>> trying to add a test
On Oct 22, 5:11 pm, William Stein wrote:
> Well like it or not, it is a fact that 0.0^0.0 = 1 *is* the official
> ISO 99 standard. Note that ISO = "international standards
> organization".
>
> I'm not making an argument here for or against this. But there is no
> arguing with it being an offici
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
>
> Michael Welsh wrote:
>> 10.0.0 is current for darwin.
>>
>> Darwin numbers are different to OS X numbers.
>
> So if 10.0.0 is current, what would be too old to be supported on Sage? I'm
> trying to add a test which will warn people if t
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:52 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 22, 4:15 pm, Fredrik Johansson
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:51 AM, John H Palmieri
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Oct 22, 2:14 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri
On 23/10/2009, at 1:02 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> Michael Welsh wrote:
>> 10.0.0 is current for darwin.
>>
>> Darwin numbers are different to OS X numbers.
>
> So if 10.0.0 is current, what would be too old to be supported on
> Sage? I'm
> trying to add a test which will warn people if th
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Bill Page wrote:
>
> William,
>
> After upgrading to 'sagenb-0.3.5.spkg' I noticed a peculiar behavior.
> If I pick an old worksheet and do 'Evaluate All' everthing appears to
> work fine but sometimes (not entirely reproducible yet) I am no longer
> able to dele
Michael Welsh wrote:
> 10.0.0 is current for darwin.
>
> Darwin numbers are different to OS X numbers.
So if 10.0.0 is current, what would be too old to be supported on Sage? I'm
trying to add a test which will warn people if their OS is too old, but I do
not
know what to check for on the Mac
10.0.0 is current for darwin.
Darwin numbers are different to OS X numbers.
On 23/10/2009, at 12:53 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> The 10.0.0 would suggest this is quite old, but the fact it's dated
> 2009 would
> suggest it is not very old.
>
> Any Mac gurus who can resolve this?
--
http://yo
Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following scares me.
>
> sage: 0^0
> 1
> sage: F.=GF(5)
> sage: F(0)^0
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> ...
> ArithmeticError: 0^0 is undefined.
>
> For any x, x^0 is 1 by definition. Isn't it in Sage? I am using Sage
> 4.1.2
>
>
> Kwankyu
For what it i
Michael Welsh wrote:
> 10.6 has darwin 10
> 10.5 has darwin 9
> 10.4 has darwin 8
Nice and logical, just like Solaris!
> I'm not sure about more depth, but my machine (10.6.1 Intel) has
>
> Gordon:~ yomcat$ uname -r
> 10.0.0
>
> My G4 with 10.5.8 has
>
> Charlie:~ charlie$ uname -r
> 9.8.0
>
On Oct 22, 4:15 pm, Fredrik Johansson
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:51 AM, John H Palmieri
>
>
>
>
>
> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 22, 2:14 pm, William Stein wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
> >> >> On
Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2009-Oct-16 13:05:02 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby"
> wrote:
>> I'm updating a configure script which will warn users if their operating
>> system
>> is too old. In the case of a Solaris 9 machine it will say:
>
> Whilst I agree in principal, I have some concerns about the
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Fredrik Johansson
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:51 AM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 22, 2:14 pm, William Stein wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
>>> >
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:51 AM, John H Palmieri
wrote:
>
> On Oct 22, 2:14 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:11 AM, John H Palmieri
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >
10.6 has darwin 10
10.5 has darwin 9
10.4 has darwin 8
I'm not sure about more depth, but my machine (10.6.1 Intel) has
Gordon:~ yomcat$ uname -r
10.0.0
My G4 with 10.5.8 has
Charlie:~ charlie$ uname -r
9.8.0
On 23/10/2009, at 9:03 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> Does anyone know what this pa
On Oct 22, 2:14 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:11 AM, John H Palmieri
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > Anyway, 0^0 is undefined in mathematics, so it's good that it's
> >
On 2009-Oct-16 13:05:02 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
>I'm updating a configure script which will warn users if their operating
>system
>is too old. In the case of a Solaris 9 machine it will say:
Whilst I agree in principal, I have some concerns about the wording.
>configure: WARNING: You
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:02 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:11 AM, John H Palmieri
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Anyway, 0^0 is undefined in mathematics, so it's good that it's
>> > undefined in Sage.
>>
>> It's defined for Sage *in
On Oct 22, 8:57 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:11 AM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
>
> > Anyway, 0^0 is undefined in mathematics, so it's good that it's
> > undefined in Sage.
>
> It's defined for Sage *integers*:
>
> sage: 0^0
> 1
What about:
sage: 0.000^0.000
1.0
I'm trying to update the code which checks for the prerequisites for Sage. I've
implemented some tests for Solaris versions, which
1) Check if the version is older than Solaris 10.
2) Advise people to upgrade if their hardware is sufficiently new
3) Tell them they can't upgrade if its too old.
On Oct 22, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Francis Clarke wrote:
The following article has interesting remarks on this question,
particularly pages 407--408:
\bib{MR1163629}{article}{
author={Knuth, Donald E.},
title={Two notes on notation},
journal={Amer. Math. Monthly},
volume={99},
date={1992}
William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> Bill Page wrote:
>>> The optional labeled axes in jmol 3-d graphics is a nice addition but
>>> take a look at, for example:
>>>
>>> line3d([(0,0,0), (-3,4,-5),(3,4,-5),(3,-4,5)])
>>>
>>> In the 4.1.2 notebook. Righ
The following article has interesting remarks on this question,
particularly pages 407--408:
\bib{MR1163629}{article}{
author={Knuth, Donald E.},
title={Two notes on notation},
journal={Amer. Math. Monthly},
volume={99},
date={1992},
number={5},
pages={403--422},
}
Among the
Hi Sage-Devel,
There is a Sage Foundation account at UW with some money, often from
private people, and also from book sales (e.g., the Sage Tutorial from
Lulu.com, which is pretty popular).People can also make
tex-deductible donations to this account.
When managing funds (e.g., with other g
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Jason Grout
wrote:
>
> Bill Page wrote:
>> The optional labeled axes in jmol 3-d graphics is a nice addition but
>> take a look at, for example:
>>
>> line3d([(0,0,0), (-3,4,-5),(3,4,-5),(3,-4,5)])
>>
>> In the 4.1.2 notebook. Right-click the image and turn on
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Bill Page wrote:
>
> William,
>
> After upgrading to 'sagenb-0.3.5.spkg' I noticed a peculiar behavior.
> If I pick an old worksheet and do 'Evaluate All' everthing appears to
> work fine but sometimes (not entirely reproducible yet) I am no longer
> able to dele
>>> For any x, x^0 is 1 by definition.
>>
>> I always thought that for any y, 0^y = 0.
>>
>> Anyway, 0^0 is undefined in mathematics, so it's good that it's
>> undefined in Sage.
>
> It's defined for Sage *integers*:
...
I think I've seen this discussion before. Categories!
Martin
--~--~-
On Oct 22, 2009, at 5:56 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Hello everybody !!!
>
> I know this is totally useless, but why shouldn't it work
> nevertheless ? :-)
>
> sage: n(pi,digits=1000)
> ---
> ValueError
About 0^0
> Even for discrete things like elements of GF(5)? I haven't thought
> about what 0^0 is for things where the continuous limit doesn't make sense.
>
In any ring, integer power x^n is défined by x^0 = 1, because an empty
product is the unit element.
The reason is the same for 0!=1.
Bill Page wrote:
> The optional labeled axes in jmol 3-d graphics is a nice addition but
> take a look at, for example:
>
> line3d([(0,0,0), (-3,4,-5),(3,4,-5),(3,-4,5)])
>
> In the 4.1.2 notebook. Right-click the image and turn on Style/Axes.
> Notice how the diagonal line does not appear to
John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 22, 1:25 am, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The following scares me.
>>
>> sage: 0^0
>> 1
>> sage: F.=GF(5)
>> sage: F(0)^0
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> ...
>> ArithmeticError: 0^0 is undefined.
>>
>> For any x, x^0 is 1 by definition.
>
> I alw
William,
After upgrading to 'sagenb-0.3.5.spkg' I noticed a peculiar behavior.
If I pick an old worksheet and do 'Evaluate All' everthing appears to
work fine but sometimes (not entirely reproducible yet) I am no longer
able to delete cells inside the worksheet. Also if I change the
contents of a
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> There were 20 test failures of mpfr due to a bug in the memset implementation
> on
> Solaris 10 on sun4m machines (those based on the T1, T2, or T2+ processors).
Oops, sun4m are quite old. It is sun4v which is effected by this bug.
--~--~-~--~~--
The optional labeled axes in jmol 3-d graphics is a nice addition but
take a look at, for example:
line3d([(0,0,0), (-3,4,-5),(3,4,-5),(3,-4,5)])
In the 4.1.2 notebook. Right-click the image and turn on Style/Axes.
Notice how the diagonal line does not appear to start at where you
would expect
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Pablo Angulo wrote:
>
>>
>> If you want to very easily try this new code (and everything else
>> we've done improving the new notebook in the last few days), just do
>> this:
>>
>> sage -i http://wstein.org/home/wstein/patches/sagenb/sagenb-0.3.5.spkg
>>
> Every
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 8:11 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 22, 1:25 am, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The following scares me.
>>
>> sage: 0^0
>> 1
>> sage: F.=GF(5)
>> sage: F(0)^0
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> ...
>> ArithmeticError: 0^0 is undefined.
>>
>> For any x,
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 03:05:25PM -0700, David Kohel wrote:
> What about the category of categories (with functors as morphisms)?
Sounds reasonable. You would have it derive from Object, right?
If yes, then I vote for leaving a TODO note in Category.category, and
postpone the creation of this n
On Oct 22, 1:25 am, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following scares me.
>
> sage: 0^0
> 1
> sage: F.=GF(5)
> sage: F(0)^0
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> ...
> ArithmeticError: 0^0 is undefined.
>
> For any x, x^0 is 1 by definition.
I always thought that for any y, 0^y = 0. :)
Anyw
There were 20 test failures of mpfr due to a bug in the memset implementation
on
Solaris 10 on sun4m machines (those based on the T1, T2, or T2+ processors).
http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/6453
The T2+ is used in the Sun T5240 at t2.math.washington.edu.
Sun have sent me a 'T' patch,
Hello Nathann,
> I know this is totally useless, but why shouldn't it work nevertheless
> ? :-)
>
> sage: n(pi,digits=1000)
Useless indeed... Maple often fails between 10^4 and 10^5 digits and
axiom around 10^5.
I don't know the reason : Ligther mathematics or bad code.
It seems that numeri
Hello everybody !!!
I know this is totally useless, but why shouldn't it work nevertheless ? :-)
sage: n(pi,digits=1000)
---
ValueErrorTraceback (most recent call last)
/user/ncohen/home/
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:52 AM, William Stein wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Mathematica released their web-based *manipulate* implementation:
>
> http://wolfram.com/products/webmathematica/
Alternate HTML content should be placed here. This content requires
the Adobe Flash Player. Get Flash
This
>
> If you want to very easily try this new code (and everything else
> we've done improving the new notebook in the last few days), just do
> this:
>
> sage -i http://wstein.org/home/wstein/patches/sagenb/sagenb-0.3.5.spkg
>
Everything smooth, including a feature I requested about a month ago.
Hi,
sage: A=matrix(2,[1,2,3,3])
sage: A.solve_right(vector([3,6]))
(1, 1)
sage: category(_)
Category of elements of Vector space of dimension 2 over Rational
Field
sage: A.solve_left(vector([3,6]))
[3 0]
sage: category(_)
Category of elements of Full MatrixSpace of 1 by 2 dense matrices over
Rati
On 2009-Oct-14 15:43:33 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
>The best I have seen in open-source development for this sort of thing
>is the wireshark developers list. Join that for a week and see what
>messages you get.
FreeBSD also has automated build bots for both the core OS (currently
4 suppo
kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 22, 2:10 am, Jason Grout wrote:
>> William Stein wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Mathematica released their web-based *manipulate* implementation:
>>> http://wolfram.com/products/webmathematica/
>>> There are a few dozen examples. They are now ahead in that they
>>> a
Hi,
The following scares me.
sage: 0^0
1
sage: F.=GF(5)
sage: F(0)^0
Traceback (most recent call last):
...
ArithmeticError: 0^0 is undefined.
For any x, x^0 is 1 by definition. Isn't it in Sage? I am using Sage
4.1.2
Kwankyu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to th
On 10/21/2009 04:22 PM, William Stein wrote:
> I've replicated this: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7263
> Basically all jmol 3d plotting at the command line is totally broken
> right now on all platforms. Not good.
Patches at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7263
They dep
Jason Grout wrote:
> A few days ago I posted a query to the jmol mailing list about getting
> nice mesh lines in jmol that we could make pretty arbitrary, like in
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/5511/mesh_function.jpeg
> (see trac #5511 for the code for that figure). Two
68 matches
Mail list logo
