Cayley tables for groups aren't working properly (http://
trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7340), so I've taken this as an
excuse to write some new code for a more general object I've been
calling an "operation table." (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/
ticket/7555) Besides groups, it could b
I've asked someone who is an active Debian developer about the removal
thing, how it is done...
Dmitrii
On Mar 5, 11:05 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
> > On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
> >>
actually, some of these "optional" things here only need an LP solver
(not a MILP solver), and Sage does have an LP solver, via
a standard package CVXOPT.
It would be nice to get rid of these dependencies on optional
packages.
Dima
On Mar 5, 8:14 am, ablondin wrote:
> Hello, everyone !
> While
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:14 PM, ablondin
wrote:
> Hello, everyone !
> While working on graph-theory related patchs, I have to test if some
> optional tests pass. I tried to test the main branch of sage 4.3.3
> without applying any new patch, but some tests fail ! Here is the
> output. I thought th
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
>> Florent Hivert wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a
>>> flame nor to disregard the hard
Hi,
new data:
sage: R. = QQ[]
sage: M = get_memory_usage()
sage: for n in range(5):
if get_memory_usage()>M:
Mnew = get_memory_usage()
print n
print Mnew-M; M=Mnew
R(1); # <- remark: I got rid of the addition
:
0
0.40234375
3323
0.12890625
5435
0.1289
On 03/04/2010 11:14 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
Florent Hivert wrote:
Hi there,
Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a
flame nor to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a
sage debian package.
However, during sage
Hi Marshall!
You are right, this better belongs to sage-devel.
What I find interesting: The memory is not constantly leaking, there
are jumps.
sage: R.=QQ[]
sage: M=get_memory_usage()
sage: for n in range(5):
: if get_memory_usage()>M:
: M = get_memory_usage()
:
On Mar 4, 2010, at 4:14 PM, Simon King wrote:
Hi Robert!
On 4 Mrz., 19:21, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
[...]
See, for example, lazy import athttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7502
Thank you very much, that was almost what I was hoping for.
What I don't like in that solution:
If you lazil
I am forwarding this from sage-support because it seems like it might
be a serious problem.
-Marshall
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yann
Date: Mar 4, 5:49 pm
Subject: Why does my little program bring my department's server to
its knees?
To: sage-support
sage: R.=QQ[]
sage: whi
Hi Robert!
On 4 Mrz., 19:21, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
[...]
> See, for example, lazy import athttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7502
Thank you very much, that was almost what I was hoping for.
What I don't like in that solution:
If you lazily import, say, QQ, then QQ will forever be a Lazy
Hello, everyone !
While working on graph-theory related patchs, I have to test if some
optional tests pass. I tried to test the main branch of sage 4.3.3
without applying any new patch, but some tests fail ! Here is the
output. I thought that sage was 100% doctests... Is my main branch
broken ? Or
On Mar 4, 4:01 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
.
> BTW, playing around I found this bug in Mathematica, by picking some extreme
> cases.
>
> In[3]:= Sin[2^900.23]
>
> Out[3]= 0.938865 // This agrees with Sage.
>
> In[4]:= Sin[2^5000.0]
>
> Out[4]= 0.
> It seems that for any sufficient
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> About the only way I can see to improve startup speed would be to
> implement some form of lazy loading - during startup, Sage just loads
> a set of stub functions (from a very small number of physical files).
> When those stubs are called, th
about test suites - random or not so maybe slightly offtopic but
didn't wanted to open new topic for something so close - I just
wonder, had anyone tested Sage against http://eqworld.ipmnet.ru/ exact
solution database? It's basic database of exact solutions for
integrals, ODEs and much more - but I
On 2010-Mar-03 21:01:54 +0100, Martin Rubey
wrote:
>William Stein writes:
>> It's interesting that in all these threads nobody has mentioned "sage
>> -startuptime". That's the command that reports on what modules are
>
>here goes:
Interesting but no smoking bullet. Looking only at the leaves,
Hello everybody !!!
I am just forwarding this news about CPLEX. It seems it can now be used for
free by researchers and students, thanks to a very good idea from IBM.
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=319342&tstart=0
CPLEX is a LP solver with very good performances. P
IBM HS22 E5540 4C 2.53GHZ 4GB BLADE
Hardware
CPU Name:Intel Xeon E5540
CPU Characteristics: Intel Turbo Boost Technology up to 2.80 GHz
CPU MHz: 2533
FPU: Integrated
CPU(s) enabled: 8 cores, 2 chips, 4 cores/chip, 2 threads/core
CP
On a 32-bit ubuntu linux machine: build fine, the same 4 test
failures as on sage.math.
John
--
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
For more options, visit this group at htt
On Mar 4, 2010, at 4:01 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Jason Grout wrote:
On 03/04/2010 04:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Anyway, it seems my view is a minority one here.
I don't think that's necessarily the case (I agree with you that
randomized testing is a good thing). However, I also agree
On Mar 4, 2010, at 5:24 AM, Simon King wrote:
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:35 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
[...]
I think we can have the names there without importing all the code
behind everything. With tab completion, a huge global namespace isn't
that bad.
How would this be possible, technically? I mea
Hi Nathann,
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 4:18 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Actually, I wouldn't know where to write them. Some of it already
> appears along the code as comments, but I wouldn't know where to write
> all this. Were you thinking about copying it inside the function's
> documentation ?
Hello !
> I strongly encourage you to include that documentation in the graph
> theory module of Sage. That is, if it's not in there already. Things
> can and will get buried in the huge mailing list archive of
> sage-devel.
Actually, I wouldn't know where to write them. Some of it already
appear
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:03:47 +0100
Florent Hivert wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a
> flame nor to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a
> sage debian package.
>
> However, during sage days 20 as well as during my cours
Hi Nathann,
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> The result is this pdf file, which I
> hope will be helpful to those who will be brave enough to review the
> corresponding patches :-)
>
> http://www-sop.inria.fr/members/Nathann.Cohen/LP_formulations.pdf
I strongly encourage
Hi there,
Disclaimer: I'm not a debian user and my intend is not to launch a flame nor
to disregard the hard work that has been done to have a sage debian package.
However, during sage days 20 as well as during my course at the university of
Rouen, I've got at least a dozen reports of peopl
And trying again to build Sage 4.3.3, MPIR seems to build fine. Sorry
or the false alarm. Thank you very much for your help!
- Ryan
--
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
F
> These types of searches are often quite interesting - probably
> something for sage-marketing ;)
its also incredibly self-referential since your e-mail is the first hit I get
:)
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99
_otr: 47F43D1A
2010/3/4 Simon King :
> Hi!
>
> On Mar 4, 8:35 am, Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
> [...]
>> I think we can have the names there without importing all the code
>> behind everything. With tab completion, a huge global namespace isn't
>> that bad.
>
> How would this be possible, technically? I mean, is th
On Mar 4, 1:28 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> I wonder how highly sagenb.org published worksheets are rated by google
> now. Do other people find that sagenb.org worksheets get good google karma?
it's probably just that pppack as a word is only seldom used and
google gives you something that is more
Hello everybody
Because of a recent patch #8404 which should soon enable Sage to test
whether a graph G contains H as a minor, I was asked to provide with these
patches an explanation of how they are built. Well, as the same technique is
used over and over, it was not too hard to explain othe
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:35 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
[...]
> I think we can have the names there without importing all the code
> behind everything. With tab completion, a huge global namespace isn't
> that bad.
How would this be possible, technically? I mean, is there a technical
solution that doe
I only had those 2 failures (the finite_semigroups ones) on a machine
running 64-bit Ubuntu 9.10.
-Marshall
On Mar 4, 2:54 am, Florent Hivert
wrote:
> Hi Minh,
>
> > This release incorporates many combinatorics tickets positively
> > reviewed during and/or before Sage Days 20.
> > * The fo
The other day, I wrote a small worksheet illustrating how to use a
PPPACK fortran routine to calculate splines in Sage [1]. PPPACK is a
venerable (in a good sense!) library for spline computation that is
decades old. I was very, very surprised today to see that a google
search for "PPPACK" tu
Jason Grout wrote:
On 03/04/2010 04:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Anyway, it seems my view is a minority one here.
I don't think that's necessarily the case (I agree with you that
randomized testing is a good thing). However, I also agree with others
that writing doctests is more importa
On 03/04/2010 05:01 AM, Pat LeSmithe wrote:
Is memory use a problem, particularly on busy servers?
It definitely could be an issue on my campus server. I have 3GB in a
virtual machine right now (I'm writing an internal school grant for more
memory soon). Fortunately (?!), I haven't been
On 3 March 2010 18:05, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This release incorporates many combinatorics tickets positively
> reviewed during and/or before Sage Days 20.
>
> Source tarball:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-4.3.4.alpha0/sage-4.3.4.alpha0.tar
>
I had a vast numbe
If this is a call for a vote ;-), let me tell that I completely agree with the
point of view that in an ideal world, tests should be written *before* the
code and by a *different* person (extreme/peer programming).
In an ideal world test would be extracted from theorems of theoretical
papers. A
On 03/04/2010 01:52 AM, John Cremona wrote:
> Could that be solved by doing that startup as soon as the person logs
> in? Or as soon as they open the worksheet (before they do the first
> evaluate)?
We already do the latter (though not for doc worksheets). From
sagenb.notebook.twist, around line
On 03/04/2010 04:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Anyway, it seems my view is a minority one here.
I don't think that's necessarily the case (I agree with you that
randomized testing is a good thing). However, I also agree with others
that writing doctests is more important for those that fe
On 03/04/2010 03:52 AM, John Cremona wrote:
On 4 March 2010 09:46, Jason Grout wrote:
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
a feel for something, o
On Mar 4, 12:27 am, Vincent D <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just opened a SAGE wiki and a discussion list in french ...
Hi, www.sagemath.fr is just the /fr subfolder on the regular sagemath
website. I just wanted to contact you or somebody else to send me some
french html snippets that i
On Mar 4, 2010, at 2:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
As I've mentioned before, internal consistency checks can be better
than comparing against commercial programs, so that way anyone can
run and verify them, and they often illustrate interesting math
(e.g. verificat
Hi David,
> Although it is true that not everyone can run tests against commercial
> software, I would have thought a significant proportion of Sage users
> could. There is already an interface to Mathematica. Many Sage users and
> developers work in universities, which often have Mathema
Jason Grout wrote:
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
a feel for something, or to factor (or even multiply) several digit
numbers. It also makes i
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
As I've mentioned before, internal consistency checks
can be better than comparing against commercial programs, so that way
anyone can run and verify them, and they often illustrate interesting
math (e.g. verification of deep, abstract theorems for specific examples).
Hi Minh,
> This release incorporates many combinatorics tickets positively
> reviewed during and/or before Sage Days 20.
> * The following tests failed on sage.math:
>
> sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/categories/finite_semigroups.py # 2
> doctests failed
> sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/cat
On 4 March 2010 09:46, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
>> run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
>> a feel for something, or to factor (or even multiply) seve
On 03/04/2010 02:35 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I often run things that take an order of magnitude less time to
run--e.g. I'm reading a paper and want to try out a quick example to get
a feel for something, or to factor (or even multiply) several digit
numbers. It also makes it prohibitive to be
Hi!
On Mar 4, 8:24 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> I believe there is also some randomized testing that is done in the
> category code that takes random elements and verifies they have the
> correct properties (e.g. commutativity, associativity, etc.) that has
> exposed some bugs.
One technic
On Mar 4, 2010, at 12:26 AM, kstueve wrote:
I believe the speed of c is worthwhile here.
The point of Cython is that it has the same speed as C, but is much
easier to use (especially from Python).
And I am not skilled in Cython.
If you already know Python, and especially if you have a w
On Mar 3, 2010, at 7:45 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
Right now it takes over 1.5 seconds every time.
wst...@sage:~$ time sage -c "print factor(2010)"
2 * 3 * 5 * 67
real0m1.535s
user0m1.140s
sys 0m0.46
I believe the speed of c is worthwhile here. And I am not skilled in
Cython.
On Mar 4, 12:12 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2010, at 10:50 AM, kstueve wrote:
>
> > I've been working more on TOS's Li based pi(x) approximation code.
> > I've been trying to optimize it in c. It seems that
There are the Wester tests, which we ship and test (the ones we can do
at least)
http://hg.sagemath.org/sage-main/file/8c4f10086e20/sage/calculus/wester.py
I believe there is also some randomized testing that is done in the
category code that takes random elements and verifies they have the
On Mar 3, 2010, at 10:50 AM, kstueve wrote:
I've been working more on TOS's Li based pi(x) approximation code.
I've been trying to optimize it in c. It seems that I need someone
more knowledgeable than myself in c to point out some simple mistake I
am making that is preventing the code from giv
55 matches
Mail list logo
