[sage-devel] Sage 4.3.4 released

Hi folks, Sage 4.3.4 was released on March 19, 2010. It is available at http://www.sagemath.org/download.html * About Sage (http://www.sagemath.org) Sage is developed by volunteers and combines over 90 open source packages. It is available for download from www.sagemath.org and its m

[sage-devel] Re: adds riemann mapping and complex interpolation

I believe that the TestSuite problems are largely unconnected to the mathematics. I should be able to handle any mathematics related problems. What I don't understand is how to manage the dumping and restoring of the custom class objects. Ethan On Mar 19, 10:44 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote: > Hi folks,

[sage-devel] Re: Exterior algebras.

On Mar 19, 10:46 am, mmarco wrote: > I would need to deal with exterior algebras, and as far as i have > seen, they are not defined in sage. I could try working on > implementing them, but i have no idea how to build the corresponding > class in sage. > > What should be the appropiate aproach? Is t

[sage-devel] adds riemann mapping and complex interpolation

Hi folks, Ticket #6648 [1] is an enhancement to add Riemann mapping functionality to Sage. I did some refereeing, but then found myself at a lost because I don't understand the mathematics that the ticket implements and I'm clueless on how to write a TestSuite required by the ticket. I would appre

[sage-devel] help with I and NumberFieldElement_quadratic

Hi, I am having problems understanding how "I" (complex unit) in Sage: sage: type(I) somehow becomes a NumberFieldElement_quadratic and that fails to convert to the sympy's I: ond...@raven:~/repos/sympy(pu)$ MPMATH_NOSAGE=yes sage -python bin/test sympy/test_external/test_sage.py --pdb ===

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Guidelines for updating standard packages

Hi John, On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 12:33 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: > By the way, to facilitate testing on Solaris, we should have a recent > binary build available so people can quickly install a copy on t2.math > (for instance) to which they have write access.  It would be great if > there wer

[sage-devel] Re: Guidelines for updating standard packages

On Mar 19, 6:21 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote: > Hi David, > > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Dr. David Kirkby > > wrote: > > > > > Does anyone have any comments on those, or additions? > > The guidelines you listed above sound reasonable to me. I agree, except for part of #4: "The author must provi

Re: [sage-devel] Guidelines for updating standard packages

Hi David, On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > Does anyone have any comments on those, or additions? The guidelines you listed above sound reasonable to me. Could you please open a ticket and add those guidelines? -- Regards Minh Van Nguyen -- To post to this group,

[sage-devel] Guidelines for updating standard packages

I said in the thread "Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)" that I felt updates to .spkg files were not done sufficiently carefully. Japp agreed with that. The developers guide has some guidance on how to update .spkg files http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/patching_spkgs.html w

Re: [sage-devel] atan2 throws "divide by zero"

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:41 PM, G B wrote: > I raised this in sage-support, and am now reasonably convinced this is > a bug.  Guidelines say the next step is to raise it here.  The full > thread is at: > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/02f3446e68381346# > > but th

[sage-devel] atan2 throws "divide by zero"

I raised this in sage-support, and am now reasonably convinced this is a bug. Guidelines say the next step is to raise it here. The full thread is at: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/02f3446e68381346# but the summary is: --- atan2(3,0) --> 1/2*p

Re: [sage-devel] Can someone close #6788

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: > #6788 was a doctest failure on Solaris, which was resolved when Maxima was > updated at #7745. Hence #6788 can be closed. Done. You can just make a comment on the ticket, and I'll close it. --Mike -- To post to this group, send an ema

[sage-devel] Can someone close #6788

#6788 was a doctest failure on Solaris, which was resolved when Maxima was updated at #7745. Hence #6788 can be closed. Dave -- 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

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

Dr. David Kirkby wrote: Robert Bradshaw wrote: [snipped] For spkgs, changes to shell scripts, etc. a it is much more important to test on a wide variety of platforms. Fortunately, most contributions are plain vanilla Python/Cython. Thanks for bringing this up, this is an example of what separa

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 2:29 pm, William Stein wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:25 PM, John H Palmieri > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 19, 11:13 am, Robert Bradshaw > > wrote: > >> On Mar 19, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: > > >> > On 19-Mar-10, at 6:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote: > > >> >> On 03

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

Robert Bradshaw wrote: On Mar 19, 2010, at 3:18 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: Craig, [...] For the record, I think it's pretty unreasonable to *require* Sage developers to test on anything but their own machine -- but I *do* think it's very reasonable to ask them to help fix problems with their p

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 11:06 am, William Stein wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:00 AM, John H Palmieri > wrote: > > Another possibility might be to first check for "--gp", "--gap", etc., > and do those before doing the general option parsing.   I.e., just do > what you already planned, but with one optimi

Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:25 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 11:13 am, Robert Bradshaw > wrote: >> On Mar 19, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On 19-Mar-10, at 6:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote: >> >> >> On 03/18/2010 10:05 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: >> >>>

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 11:13 am, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On Mar 19, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 19-Mar-10, at 6:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote: > > >> On 03/18/2010 10:05 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: > >>> Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather > >>> t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Exterior algebras.

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:00 PM, bump wrote: >> I hope other people respond, too.  I would suggest looking at >> >> >> >> and the code in sage/algebras/quatalg (for quaternion algebras): use >> this as one model for how to implement a noncommut

[sage-devel] Re: Exterior algebras.

> I hope other people respond, too. I would suggest looking at > > > > and the code in sage/algebras/quatalg (for quaternion algebras): use > this as one model for how to implement a noncommutative algebra. Another place to look is algebras/iw

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

On Mar 19, 2010, at 7:59 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote: Craig Citro wrote: It would be nice to have an automatic build-farm where you can just run tests on all the needed platforms, and fix the results, but this would, for instance, seem to require a central repository with a current snapshot

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

On Mar 19, 2010, at 3:18 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: Craig, [...] For the record, I think it's pretty unreasonable to *require* Sage developers to test on anything but their own machine -- but I *do* think it's very reasonable to ask them to help fix problems with their patches that arise on

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 11:06 am, William Stein wrote: > > I'm still concerned about slowing down all of the "sage > -various_system" commands.  A typical use case of Sage for some > sysadmins is to install Sage system-wide, type "sage: > install_scripts('/usr/local/bin/')", and get scripts "gp", "gap", > etc.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 2010, at 11:06 AM, William Stein wrote: On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:00 AM, John H Palmieri > wrote: On Mar 19, 1:36 am, William Stein wrote: On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Dan Drake wrote: On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 at 12:52AM -0700, William Stein wrote: The main issue I see is that usin

Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Nick Alexander wrote: On 19-Mar-10, at 6:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote: On 03/18/2010 10:05 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are two rea

Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:00 AM, John H Palmieri wrote: > On Mar 19, 1:36 am, William Stein wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Dan Drake wrote: >> > On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 at 12:52AM -0700, William Stein wrote: >> >> The main issue I see is that using getopt or optparse means that the >> >>

[sage-devel] Re: Exterior algebras.

On Mar 19, 10:46 am, mmarco wrote: > I would need to deal with exterior algebras, and as far as i have > seen, they are not defined in sage. I could try working on > implementing them, but i have no idea how to build the corresponding > class in sage. > > What should be the appropiate aproach? I

[sage-devel] Exterior algebras.

I would need to deal with exterior algebras, and as far as i have seen, they are not defined in sage. I could try working on implementing them, but i have no idea how to build the corresponding class in sage. What should be the appropiate aproach? Is there some documentation about how to build new

Re: [sage-devel] improvements to FEMhub with regards to Sage

Hi William! On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:34 PM, William Stein wrote: > 2010/2/22 Ondrej Certik : >> Hi, >> >> some FEMhub users are confused by seeing the name "Sage" in >> warnings and error messages, and in various installation scripts >> and messages. They are there because FEMhub uses some >> fu

Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On 19-Mar-10, at 6:53 AM, Jason Grout wrote: On 03/18/2010 10:05 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are two reasons: +1! When this issue came up a year or two ago,

[sage-devel] Re: presentation at Jr. Science and Humanities Symposium in Reno

Hi, On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > Hi, > > at 6pm today we'll be giving a presentation about FEMhub[0] at the > 2010 Northern California Western Nevada > Jr. Science and Humanities Symposium[1, 2]. > > I'll talk about sympy as part of it for about 10 minutes. I've > prepa

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

about 10 years ago I worked full-time on CGAL (www.cgal.org) for a while, and we had a kind of (semi)automatic testing suite that pulled a snapshot from a CVS server, ran tests on a number of platforms, and reported results on a webpage. Dima On Mar 19, 10:59 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote: > Cra

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 6:52 am, Martin Albrecht wrote: > > - how about "sage -valgrind" and friends, or "sage -t FILE -valgrind", > > I find these incredibly useful! Great! I thought someone had said that they were broken, so I'm happy that they're not. -- John -- To post to this group, send an email to

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 1:36 am, William Stein wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Dan Drake wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 at 12:52AM -0700, William Stein wrote: > >> The main issue I see is that using getopt or optparse means that the > >> "local/bin/sage-sage" script will go from not depending on Pyt

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

Craig Citro wrote: It would be nice to have an automatic build-farm where you can just run tests on all the needed platforms, and fix the results, but this would, for instance, seem to require a central repository with a current snapshot of Sage, something hardly feasible in any moment, except,

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:52 PM, William Stein wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Dan Drake wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 at 09:05PM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote: > >> Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather > >> than --notebook). I propose that we switch to

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

> It would be nice to have an automatic build-farm where you can just > run tests > on all the needed platforms, and fix the results, but this would, for > instance, seem to > require  a central repository with a current snapshot of Sage, > something hardly > feasible in any moment, except, perhaps

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On 03/18/2010 10:05 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are two reasons: +1! When this issue came up a year or two ago, there seemed to be a surprising amount of oppos

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

> - how about "sage -valgrind" and friends, or "sage -t FILE -valgrind", I find these incredibly useful! Martin -- name: Martin Albrecht _pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99 _otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF _www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.d

Re: [sage-devel] Re: NTL-5.5.2 and gf2x

On Friday 19 March 2010, YannLC wrote: > Hi François, > I have no problem building Sage from scratch with NTL 5.5.2 and gf2x. > As I said, I have myself available spkgs (and patches) doing them job > (modifiy spkg-install, remove or modify the patches to NTL, update > spkg/standard/deps etc). > My

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 at 01:36AM -0700, William Stein wrote: > PARI starts up nearly twice as fast as Python (for me on boxen.math): > > wst...@boxen:~$ time sage -gp < /dev/null > real0m0.030s > user0m0.000s > sys 0m0.010s > wst...@boxen:~$ time sage -python < /dev/null > real0m0.

[sage-devel] Re: Sage 4.3.4.rc0 builds ok on Solaris 10 (SPARC)

Craig, [...] > For the record, I think it's pretty unreasonable to *require* Sage > developers to test on anything but their own machine -- but I *do* > think it's very reasonable to ask them to help fix problems with their > patches that arise on other architectures, especially if we can give > t

[sage-devel] Re: Latest Magma fails to load

Hi, I solved this problem by changing the Magma script to not search in the DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH (in $ROOT/magma): #DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH=$DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH:$ROOT # original line DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH=$ROOT # hard code to use libgmp.3.dylib in $ROOT Similarly, if you want to use another libgmp3 (ve

[sage-devel] Re: Latest Magma fails to load

This is now Ticket #8560 http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8560 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 For more options, visit this group at http://groups.g

Re: [sage-devel] ZZ and QQ, p-adic valuations

I forwarded this to sage-nt as being a better place for the discussion! John On 18 March 2010 22:53, Robert Miller wrote: > Does anyone see a reason why there should be two function names? > > sage: QQ(7).valuation(7) > 1 > sage: ZZ(7).ord(7) > 1 > > Any opinions on which is better? I myself use

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Latest Magma fails to load

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:42 AM, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > Hi William, > > That works. Thank you. If you don't, I will open a ticket for this. > > Kwankyu Please open a ticket. Thanks! William > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this gr

[sage-devel] Re: Latest Magma fails to load

Hi William, That works. Thank you. If you don't, I will open a ticket for this. 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 For more options, visit this group at http://g

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Dan Drake wrote: > On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 at 12:52AM -0700, William Stein wrote: >> The main issue I see is that using getopt or optparse means that the >> "local/bin/sage-sage" script will go from not depending on Python to >> depending on Python.  This may cause tro

Re: [sage-devel] Latest Magma fails to load

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > Hi, > > In Mac OS, latest Magma v2.16-6 fails to load under Sage 4.3.3, with > the following error message: > > sage: magma_console() > dyld: Library not loaded: @executable_path/libgmp.3.dylib >  Referenced from: /Applications/Magma/bin/magma.

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 at 12:52AM -0700, William Stein wrote: > The main issue I see is that using getopt or optparse means that the > "local/bin/sage-sage" script will go from not depending on Python to > depending on Python. This may cause trouble for the build system, and > may slow down commands

[sage-devel] Latest Magma fails to load

Hi, In Mac OS, latest Magma v2.16-6 fails to load under Sage 4.3.3, with the following error message: sage: magma_console() dyld: Library not loaded: @executable_path/libgmp.3.dylib Referenced from: /Applications/Magma/bin/magma.exe Reason: Incompatible library version: magma.exe requires ver

[sage-devel] Re: f95 in cvxopt --- still needed? f77blas?

Thanks. A related question: is it possible to get rid of f77blas dependency? It seems that its functionality is not needed, as it can be replaced by other libraries that come with Sage. Dima On Mar 19, 1:41 pm, William Stein wrote: > 2010/3/18 Dima Pasechnik : > > > I am preparing cvxopt-1.1.2 s

Re: [sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Adam Webb wrote: > > > On Mar 19, 5:05 am, John H Palmieri wrote: >> Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather >> than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are >> two reasons: >> >> 1. They're standard, and standa

[sage-devel] Re: proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Mar 19, 5:05 am, John H Palmieri wrote: > Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather > than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are > two reasons: > > 1. They're standard, and standards are good. People used to Unix-type > systems will expect

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Dan Drake wrote: > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 at 09:05PM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote: >> Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather >> than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are >> two reasons: > > A big +1 here. No ne

Re: [sage-devel] proposal: standard command-line options in Sage

On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 at 09:05PM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote: > Sage uses non-standard command-line options (e.g., -notebook rather > than --notebook). I propose that we switch to standard ones. Here are > two reasons: A big +1 here. No need to reinvent the wheel; we are manually parsing command-li

[sage-devel] Re: NTL-5.5.2 and gf2x

Hi François, I have no problem building Sage from scratch with NTL 5.5.2 and gf2x. As I said, I have myself available spkgs (and patches) doing them job (modifiy spkg-install, remove or modify the patches to NTL, update spkg/standard/deps etc). My problem is that the policy is to make new spkg opti