Harald,
you can have a look at
http://packages.debian.org/lenny/ttf-mscorefonts-installer
for a similar functionality in a debian package.
Dima
On Mar 8, 2:09 am, Harald Schilly wrote:
> On Mar 7, 9:28 am, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> > +1.
> > This might actually be the way to go, more or less -
Personally, I think there should not be an automatic changeover to
numerical methods.
+1. The convention in Sage is that "explicit is better than
implicit". If you want numerical results, you ask for numerical
results.
Nick
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegr
No, there should be no automatic switchover to numerics, IM(not so)HO.
By the way, numerics might get very slow if the convergence is slow,
particularly
in multivariate cases (where Monte-Carlo might be the method of
choice), give weird results because
of bad scaling, etc...
Best,
Dima
On Mar 8,
Oscar Gerardo Lazo Arjona wrote:
I've recently had trouble with an integral:
sage: integral(x^3/(e^x-1),x,0,oo)
TypeError: unable to make sense of Maxima expression
'limit(6*li[4](e^x)-6*x*polylog3(e^x)+3*x^2*polylog2(e^x)+x^3*log(1-e^x)-x^4/4,x,inf)-pi^4/15'
in Sage
Other mathematical
I've recently had trouble with an integral:
sage: integral(x^3/(e^x-1),x,0,oo)
TypeError: unable to make sense of Maxima expression
'limit(6*li[4](e^x)-6*x*polylog3(e^x)+3*x^2*polylog2(e^x)+x^3*log(1-e^x)-x^4/4,x,inf)-pi^4/15'
in Sage
Other mathematical software (Mathematica) make numeri
Hi Dan,
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 7:03 AM, bump wrote:
>> * At least one person must step up to maintain the dot2tex for the
>> next few years. There is at least one case where a package was part of
>> the standard spkg repository, i.e. dsage. However, after a few months
>> the lead developer starte
The commands you used only affect the precision used in the
interactive gp session which some functions might use, and also in the
output precision when you view a pari object. To get pari library
functions to use higher precsision you need to pass a suitable value
of their prec parameter.
Alex G
I have a question regarding Pari's precision, based on the following example:
{{{
sage: x = polygen(QQ)
sage: f = x^10 - 14*x^9 + 1274*x^8 - 3998*x^7 + 42695*x^6 - 46971*x^5
+ 425120*x^4 - 151941*x^3 + 1819141*x^2 - 95913*x + 3521893
sage: K. = NumberField(f)
sage: D = gp(K.pari_bnf())
sage: D.bnf
On Mar 7, 9:28 am, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> +1.
> This might actually be the way to go, more or less --- make sage
> debian package a downloader.
I've coded that some time ago, using aria2c for efficient downloading.
It's quite simple. I just wasn't able to pack this together into
a .deb file be
Hi there,
> > Note that I've no idea how hard it is to implement in trac, neither if we
> > have the necessary hardware to support this load.
>
> >From reading the Sage merge script, I think one could use that script
> or write something along similar lines to implement a (simple)
> proof-o
Hi Florent,
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Florent Hivert
wrote:
> Note that I've no idea how hard it is to implement in trac, neither if we
> have the necessary hardware to support this load.
>From reading the Sage merge script, I think one could use that script
or write something along si
Try wrapping 171 with Integer and int, and 1.0 with float and RR in various
combinations. My guess is that Python's treating 1.0 as a float.
David
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:15 AM, mhampton wrote:
> One clue is that factorial(171) is too big to fit as a long int in
> python. This is somehow han
One clue is that factorial(171) is too big to fit as a long int in
python. This is somehow handled better by the pre-parsing I guess.
-Marshall
On Mar 7, 6:25 am, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 04:14:41AM -0800, jyr wrote:
> > sage: print ln(factorial(171)*1.0)
> > 711.7
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Having a rule that
* Now updates to standard packages (since these often introduce as many
problems as they solve)
* Only bug fixes - no enhancements.
then IMHO, we could stabilise Sage somewhat.
Sorry, I was suggesting there were *no* updates to standard packages
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Mar 6, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I thought there was going to be a 4.4 stabilisation release, but if I
create a new trac ticket, I'm given the milestone options are 4.3.4
and 4.5 - there is no 4.4 choice.
IMHO, it would be good if the stabilisation r
Hi
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 04:14:41AM -0800, jyr wrote:
> sage: print ln(factorial(171)*1.0)
> 711.714725802290
> If, on the other hand, you save it to a python file and execute it via
> the attach() command you get:
> inf
> Is this a bug or am I missing something obvious?
sage: attach mytest.sag
Hi,
If you copy and paste the following into a command line sage session
print ln(factorial(171))
print ln(factorial(171).n(100))
print ln(factorial(171)).n(100)
print ln(factorial(171)*1.0)
you get:
sage: print ln(factorial(171))
log(124101807021766782342484052410310399261660557750169318538895
On Mar 7, 2010, at 3:20 AM, Florent Hivert wrote:
Hi,
A 30-second skim through the list gives me the impression that
there are
probably 3 or 4 issues total that are causing all of these
failures. Of
course I could be wrong, and who knows how hard it will be to fix
those
homology ones
Hi,
> A 30-second skim through the list gives me the impression that there are
> probably 3 or 4 issues total that are causing all of these failures. Of
> course I could be wrong, and who knows how hard it will be to fix those
> homology ones (= chomp didn't build correctly?). This one ju
John H Palmieri wrote:
On Mar 6, 7:58 pm, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
On Mar 6, 2010, at 4:06 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
[snip]
A 30-second skim through the list gives me the impression that there
are probably 3 or 4 issues total that are causing all of these
failures. Of course I could be w
+1.
This might actually be the way to go, more or less --- make sage
debian package a downloader.
Debian actually has such packages, e.g., something that downloads free
fonts for OO...
Dima
On Mar 7, 3:47 pm, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
> On 7 bře, 01:05, William Stein wrote:
>
>
>
> > It's not c
21 matches
Mail list logo
