[sage-devel] Re: univariate polynomial gcd is slow forn number fields

2010-03-16 Thread luisfe
On 16 mar, 23:27, daveloeffler wrote: > Can you give an example where polynomials are being passed incorrectly > to Pari? There are some known bugs in Pari's own factorisation > routines (fixed in Pari 2.3.5, which should hopefully be in the next > Sage release), but if there are problems transl

[sage-devel] Re: univariate polynomial gcd is slow forn number fields

2010-03-16 Thread daveloeffler
On Mar 16, 8:29 pm, luisfe wrote: > The issue is that for univariates polynomials over absolute number > fields, the implementation is just the generic one using Euclidean > algorithm. I tried passing to pari but I am afraid that the pari > coertion for these polynomials is incorrect. Is this a

[sage-devel] univariate polynomial gcd is slow forn number fields

2010-03-16 Thread luisfe
I have been recently working with univariate polynomials over number fields and find the gcd very slow. At least for absolute number fields Sage should behave better. for QQ[x], gcd is also slow right now, but this is being addressed in #4000 The issue is that for univariates polynomials over abs

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Debian package...

2010-03-16 Thread Paulo César Pereira de Andrade
2010/3/14 Kasper Peeters : >> That review process is what killed the Debian sagemath package >> -- Upgrading during the review process >> sends you to the back of the queue, and by a year after my original >> submission, I had left MIT graduate school to start a startup, and I no >> longer had the

[sage-devel] integrate, diff and subs using wildcard bug II

2010-03-16 Thread Felix Salfelder
Sorry. i forgot to mention that the bug was observed in version 4.3.3 (from source tarball, fresh install) on a (rather untouched) lenny/2.6.26-amd46. regards felix On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 02:42:19PM +0100, Felix Salfelder wrote: > Hi all. > > I just encountered something like a bug, when i trie

[sage-devel] integrate, diff and subs using wildcard bug

2010-03-16 Thread Felix Salfelder
Hi all. I just encountered something like a bug, when i tried to calculate some statistics. here is an example: \begin{example} var('x s') assume(x>0) S=x.parent() w0=S.wild(0) f(x) = (2/sqrt(pi)*exp(-s^2)).integrate(s,0,x) g(x) = f(x).diff(x) h(x) = diff(erf(x),x) print "g :", g print "h :", h p

[sage-devel] Re: [debian-sage] Re: Re: Debian package...

2010-03-16 Thread Harald Schilly
On Mar 16, 4:47 am, Dan Drake wrote: > In any case, athttps://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPAit says a PPA > only gets 1 GB of disk space, which is problematic for Sage. ... No, it's not. Just ad "aria2" as a dependency for the package and grab the ubuntu binary via aria2c --seed-time=0 http://.

Re: [sage-devel] Is there a need for the experimental bison package?

2010-03-16 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2010-Mar-11 12:23:27 +, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: "This package exists mainly because it's very easy to build, and it removes a SAGE dependency. yacc/bison is primarily a build-time dependency (the only runtime bit that bison potentially needs are the NLS translati

Re: [sage-devel] Is there a need for the experimental bison package?

2010-03-16 Thread Dr. David Kirkby
Peter Jeremy wrote: On 2010-Mar-11 12:23:27 +, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: "This package exists mainly because it's very easy to build, and it removes a SAGE dependency. I don't like all these "it's easy and quick to build" packages. They have a nasty tendency to breed and lots of "quick

Re: [sage-devel] Is there a need for the experimental bison package?

2010-03-16 Thread Peter Jeremy
On 2010-Mar-11 12:23:27 +, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: >"This package exists mainly because it's very easy to build, and it removes a >SAGE dependency. I don't like all these "it's easy and quick to build" packages. They have a nasty tendency to breed and lots of "quick & easy" packages wind

[sage-devel] Graph classes in Sage... Including the whole of ISGCI

2010-03-16 Thread Nathann Cohen
Hello everybody !!! I have begun to write a parser for the database ISGCI [1] of which we talked already in [2]. For the moment, I have been able to obtain the list of classes and their inclusions, plus the complexity of several problems studied on them. It will be great, and it will be soon !!! B

Re: [sage-devel] add section on deprecation to developer's guide?

2010-03-16 Thread Florent Hivert
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:43:16PM +0900, Dan Drake wrote: > On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 at 01:32PM +1100, Minh Nguyen wrote: > > Sounds good to me. Could you open a ticket and share your tips on > > proper ways to deprecate a function? > > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8546 > > That ticket c