Just for information, here are some other multiple packages. I would
guess that the newer versions of glpk and pexpect in experimental are
tests. Others seem to be older versions that were left behind after
promotion of the package.
standard vs optional
boehm_gc-7.1.p2 boehm_gc-7.1.p0
standar
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 at 10:18AM +0700, Mike Hansen wrote:
> Sage 4.3.rc0 is out. Source and binary are available at
Builds fine on Ubuntu 9.10 amd64, but I have a couple doctest failures,
both of which seem like harmless changes to the LaTeX output:
dr...@sagenb:~/s/sage-4.3.rc0$ ./sage -t
d
On 12/10/09, William Stein wrote:
> 1. "maxima opens the root directory / and stats each file found there.
> Then it does the same thing for the /u (home) directory. The sys
> admin believes the bottleneck is the slow response of doing a stat on
> each NFS home directory, especially slowed down
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 at 10:18AM +0700, Mike Hansen wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Sage 4.3.rc0 is out. Source and binary are available at
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/release/4.3/rc0/sage-4.3.rc0.tar
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/release/4.3/rc0/sage-4.3.rc0-sage.math
William Stein wrote:
> Hi Sage-Devel,
>
> Have you ever wondered about the mathematics behind how MPFR, GMP,
> MPIR, etc., work under the hood? Fortunately, Paul Zimmerman and
> Richard Brent just published a new very-accessible book about exactly
> this, and has the foresight to release their bo
Hello all,
Sage 4.3.rc0 is out. Source and binary are available at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/release/4.3/rc0/sage-4.3.rc0.tar
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mhansen/release/4.3/rc0/sage-4.3.rc0-sage.math.washington.edu-x86_64-Linux.tar.gz
The upgrade path is
http://sage
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:07 PM, David Kirkby wrote:
> It is clear that new upstream packages are going to be frequently
> released. Sometimes upgrading the .spkg in Sage causes problems, so
> the upgrade is put off. This was the case with Maxima I believe. But
> eventually Maxima was upgraded, an
It is clear that new upstream packages are going to be frequently
released. Sometimes upgrading the .spkg in Sage causes problems, so
the upgrade is put off. This was the case with Maxima I believe. But
eventually Maxima was upgraded, and that upgrade caused numerous
issues that needed resolving.
VictorMiller wrote:
> To do this correctly in full generality one needs to get into
> "cyclindrical algebraic decomposition" -- a set in R^n has a
> cylindrical algebraic
> decomposition if it is written as a finite union of sets of the form
> { x : f(x) > 0 } where f is a polynomial. There is an
To do this correctly in full generality one needs to get into
"cyclindrical algebraic decomposition" -- a set in R^n has a
cylindrical algebraic
decomposition if it is written as a finite union of sets of the form
{ x : f(x) > 0 } where f is a polynomial. There is an algorithm due
to Tarski
for cr
Hi!
On 10 Dez., 23:15, William Stein wrote:
[...]
> f := x < y
>
> > f*(-3)
> > ;
>
> -3 y < -3 x
>
> > f*z;
>
> *(x < y, z)
>
> > f*a;
>
> *(x < y, a)
What els
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:33 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, William Stein wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:32 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>> >> At this point, I'm just throwing some remarks out, not saying that we
>> >> should
>> >> do anything in particular.
>>
>> >> I'm curious
On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:32 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
> >> At this point, I'm just throwing some remarks out, not saying that we
> >> should
> >> do anything in particular.
>
> >> I'm curious -- who multiplies equalities by a scalar *except* high school
Hello,
In upgrading Sage (http://sagemath.org) from Maxima-5.16 to
Maxima-5.19 some of our users have encountered a major show-stopper
issue. These are users that install Sage on certain NFS mounted
directories where certain filesystem operations are necessarily slow.
Basically, starting up Maxi
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:32 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>> At this point, I'm just throwing some remarks out, not saying that we should
>> do anything in particular.
>>
>> I'm curious -- who multiplies equalities by a scalar *except* high school
>> students or college students taking entry level coll
On Dec 10, 2009, at 1:55 AM, javier wrote:
> Well, the list comprehension doesn't make a lot of sense here.
I think they do. List comprehensions are quite fast and express the
intent well.
def diffE(a,b):
b = set(b)
return [x for x in a if x not in b]
Is both the fastest (on the dat
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:47 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 10, 3:30 am, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
>> Dear sage-devel
>>
>> I tried to use plot_region as follows
>> plot_region(-1
> Note that the documentation for region_plot (not plot_region, though
> that would be good to add as an alias) say
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 7:35 AM, MaxTheMouse wrote:
> I ran into a couple of things while creating a script to install some
> optional packages.
>
> pil-1.1.6 is listed as an optional package and pil-1.1.6.p2 is listed
> as standard. The optional one can be dropped?
Done.
>
> A couple of optiona
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:54 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> I have a proposal about M * A, where M is a Sage matrix and A a NumPy
> array. The current behaviour appears to be the Kronecker product; I'm
> guessing that this is just be a side-effect of Python applying
> element-wise __mul__ (if i
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:49 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> I've started work on efficient sparse matrices over RDF/CDF, and here's
> my first round of questions/proposals. I commit to providing an
> implementation of these if accepted.
>
> 1) When multiplying sparse with dense, action.pyx conv
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:30 AM, andrejv wrote:
>
> On Dec 10, 12:39 pm, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
> > On 10 pro, 11:02, Harald Schilly wrote:
> >
> > > > (%i3) ratsimp(a), algebraic=true;
> >
> > > Ok, is it wise to do this by default if called from sage?
> >
> > Not sure (could it break someth
>
> At this point, I'm just throwing some remarks out, not saying that we should
> do anything in particular.
>
> I'm curious -- who multiplies equalities by a scalar *except* high school
> students or college students taking entry level college algebra classes?
Or those in calculus or LP classes
This is a question about class design in SAGE.
I'm going to implement classes for various flavors of decision
diagrams using the outside package CUDD. It turns out that Cudd and
its library is already part of SAGE -- it's included as part of
Polybori (which uses it "under the covers"). The inter
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:45 AM, Mike Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:37 PM, ma...@mendelu.cz
wrote:
>> sage: f = x + 3 < y - 2
>> sage: f*(-1)
>> -x - 3 < -y + 2
>>
>> Is this really intended behavior? Shouldnt the answer be the
>> following?
>>
>> sage: f*(-1)
>> -x - 3 > -y + 2
>>
>
Alexander Dreyer wrote:
> Dear Dave,
>> From
>> http://developers.sun.com/solaris/articles/cmp_stlport_libCstd.html
>> I read, that one might have to build with -library=stlport4 .
>>
>> I'll try it out.
FWIW,
the HP C++ compiler for HP-UX has exactly the same issue as the Sun Studio
compiler -
I've created two small scripts (testcc.sh and testcxx.sh) which work out what
compiler is in use - whether it is gcc, or one of several other compilers (Sun,
HP, IBM etc). It would be really good to get these into Sage, as it would make
numerous tests a lot easier.
The ticket for these is
http
kcrisman wrote:
>
> On Dec 10, 3:30 am, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
>> Dear sage-devel
>>
>> I tried to use plot_region as follows
>> plot_region(-1
> Note that the documentation for region_plot (not plot_region, though
> that would be good to add as an alias) says we have to use a list to
> do mu
I ran into a couple of things while creating a script to install some
optional packages.
pil-1.1.6 is listed as an optional package and pil-1.1.6.p2 is listed
as standard. The optional one can be dropped?
A couple of optional packages have multiple versions.
$ sage -c "install_package('pyx')"
Po
On Dec 10, 3:30 am, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
> Dear sage-devel
>
> I tried to use plot_region as follows
> plot_region(-10, x>0], ...)
and technically -1http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
On Dec 10, 3:48 am, Pablo Angulo wrote:
> This is related to a subtle, undocumented difference between these two
> definitions of a symbolic expression:
These are not both symbolic expressions per se - one is callable, the
other one isn't. These used to be called SymbolicExpression and
Callabl
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> 3) As mentioned earlier I'd like to implement explicitly diagonal and
> hermitian matrices (at least for RDF and CDF). Would this be OK?:
>
> sage: parent(hermitian_matrix(RDF, 3))
> Full MatrixSpace of 3 by 3 Hermitian matrices over Real Double Field
>
> sage: parent
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> I have a proposal about M * A, where M is a Sage matrix and A a NumPy
> array. The current behaviour appears to be the Kronecker product; I'm
> guessing that this is just be a side-effect of Python applying
> element-wise __mul__ (if it is intentional and relied upo
I have a proposal about M * A, where M is a Sage matrix and A a NumPy
array. The current behaviour appears to be the Kronecker product; I'm
guessing that this is just be a side-effect of Python applying
element-wise __mul__ (if it is intentional and relied upon, this
proposal got harder).
I do
I've started work on efficient sparse matrices over RDF/CDF, and here's
my first round of questions/proposals. I commit to providing an
implementation of these if accepted.
1) When multiplying sparse with dense, action.pyx converts sparse
matrices to dense matrices. I'm not sure about other use
Great, thanks for explanation. Robert
On 10 pro, 13:30, andrejv wrote:
>
> I don't think there is a bug there. It's just that one form is harder
> to compute numerically because of rounding errors.
>
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this
On Dec 10, 12:39 pm, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
> On 10 pro, 11:02, Harald Schilly wrote:
>
> > > (%i3) ratsimp(a), algebraic=true;
>
> > Ok, is it wise to do this by default if called from sage?
>
> Not sure (could it break something in integration for example?) but
> without this we have bug des
Hi Florent!
On Dec 10, 10:56 am, Florent Hivert
wrote:
> > AFAIK, a set is internally represented by a sorted binary tree that,
> > ideally, is balanced.
>
> I think that's not true. It is implemented as a hash table. Indeed, when you
> put something into a set, you need the element to be hashabl
On 10 pro, 11:02, Harald Schilly wrote:
> > (%i3) ratsimp(a), algebraic=true;
>
> Ok, is it wise to do this by default if called from sage?
Not sure (could it break something in integration for example?) but
without this we have bug described at
http://groups.google.cz/group/sage-devel/browse_t
but aren't all the hashable elements ordered in python ? You can
compare tuples, integers, Sets, etc...
I always wondered how these comparison worked ( and guesses hash
functions should be hiding somewhere )
Nathann
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsub
Hi Simon,
> Not a big surprise, I would say. I mean, think what "v in b" does, if
> b is a list that does not contain v, and what it does if b is a set.
> AFAIK, a set is internally represented by a sorted binary tree that,
> ideally, is balanced.
>
> So, in order to find out that v is NOT
Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Thank you very much for your answers !!! I will try to fix these small
> issues along with real patches, as I go over the code in the Graph
> Section... Most of the time lists are used to represent sets, and I
> guess it can be improved in a few cases :-)
If you know the un
On Dec 10, 7:27 am, andrejv wrote:
> Maxima will remove roots from the denominator by default. You need to
> set the option variable algebraic:
>
> (%i3) ratsimp(a), algebraic=true;
Ok, is it wise to do this by default if called from sage?
H
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-deve
Thank you very much for your answers !!! I will try to fix these small
issues along with real patches, as I go over the code in the Graph
Section... Most of the time lists are used to represent sets, and I
guess it can be improved in a few cases :-)
Nathann
--
To post to this group, send an emai
Well, the list comprehension doesn't make a lot of sense here. Even if
you want to be as pythonic as possible, you don't want to run the
comprehension through all the elements on A, when you can do it just
in the elements of B:
def diffD(a,b):
c = copy(a)
for y in b:
c.remove(y)
Thankss !!! :-)
Nathann
2009/12/10 Carlo Hamalainen :
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Nathann Cohen
> wrote:
>> After a few tests, lists are slightly better for append/pop than set
>> is for add/remove. Obviously remove(i) for lists is linear, and hence
>> much longer than it is in
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> After a few tests, lists are slightly better for append/pop than set
> is for add/remove. Obviously remove(i) for lists is linear, and hence
> much longer than it is in sets...
Time complexity of various operations on sets, lists, dictionar
After a few tests, lists are slightly better for append/pop than set
is for add/remove. Obviously remove(i) for lists is linear, and hence
much longer than it is in sets...
I will take a look at the Graph section considering this :-)
Nathann
On Dec 10, 10:30 am, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> ( I forgo
( I forgot to add that in all these cases, lists represent Sets and
nothing else ( no repetition, no order, etc... ))
2009/12/10 Nathann Cohen :
> In understand, but then there are many places where lists are used in
> the Graph section where sets would greatly improve the performances !
>
> Natha
In understand, but then there are many places where lists are used in
the Graph section where sets would greatly improve the performances !
Nathann
2009/12/10 Simon King :
> Hi Nathann!
>
> On Dec 10, 9:02 am, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> [...]
>> time cA=diffA(a,b)
>> CPU times: user 29.36 s, sys: 0.
Hi Nathann!
On Dec 10, 9:02 am, Nathann Cohen wrote:
[...]
> time cA=diffA(a,b)
> CPU times: user 29.36 s, sys: 0.09 s, total: 29.45 s
> Wall time: 29.76 s
>
> time cB=diffB(a,b)
> CPU times: user 0.03 s, sys: 0.01 s, total: 0.04 s
> Wall time: 0.04 s
Not a big surprise, I would say. I mean, thi
Hello !!!
I just tried it, and I'm actually quite surprised
def diffA(a,b):
return [v for v in a if v not in b]
def diffB(a,b):
return list(Set(a).difference(Set(b)))
n=10
k=1
a = range(n)
b = list(Set([randint(0,n) for i in range(k)]))
time cA=diffA(a,b)
CPU times: user 29
This is related to a subtle, undocumented difference between these two
definitions of a symbolic expression:
var('v')
r(v)=v
print r
///
v |--> v
r=v
print r
///
v
so both are printed different, but they return the same value when
called with a question mark:
r?
///
*File:*
/opt/sage-4.1.1/loc
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:37 PM, ma...@mendelu.cz wrote:
> sage: f = x + 3 < y - 2
> sage: f*(-1)
> -x - 3 < -y + 2
>
> Is this really intended behavior? Shouldnt the answer be the
> following?
>
> sage: f*(-1)
> -x - 3 > -y + 2
>
> But what about f*(a) or f*(x-2)? Should Sage return this?
> (-x-
On Dec 10, 8:58 am, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Hello everybody !!!
>
> I recently had to write two very easy lines of python, and I wondered
> if there was ( there is ) a better way to write them. The problem is
> easy : I have a list A, a list B whose elements all belong to A, and I
> want to retur
Dear sage-devel
this is doctested in relation.py
sage: f = x + 3 < y - 2
sage: f*(-1)
-x - 3 < -y + 2
Is this really intended behavior? Shouldnt the answer be the
following?
sage: f*(-1)
-x - 3 > -y + 2
But what about f*(a) or f*(x-2)? Should Sage return this?
(-x-3)*(x-2)<(2-y)*(x-2)
Or rai
Dear sage-devel
I tried to use plot_region as follows
plot_region(-1http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
56 matches
Mail list logo
