Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I don't see why libiconv is needed on Cygwin.
One can install libiconv on Cygwin system-wide, using the Cygwin
installer.
I expect you can install iconv using the installer, but iconv is not installed
by default, which goes away from Sage's philosophy of including all the
Dan, seems to work fine on my Chromium on Ubunbtu 9.10 but i dont
think i have the daily build. The deletion maneuver (along with double-
click erase) is turned off, right click is the new deletion of
vertices.
Nice catch Rob. It should be fixed now. Tell me how it looks.
I posted a big patch wit
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 3:47 PM, G B wrote:
> Burcin--
>
> Now that I've managed to divide the discussion between two groups, I
> should try to help organize the mess I made.
>
> Ondrej mentioned in the sage-support discussion that he's opened
> ticket 8564. Unfortunately I don't understand the p
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> Congrats Minh, thanks for all your persistence hard work!
Congrats!
Ondrej
--
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
I don't see why libiconv is needed on Cygwin.
One can install libiconv on Cygwin system-wide, using the Cygwin
installer.
On Mar 22, 5:50 am, Florent Hivert
wrote:
> Hi There,
>
> Thanks to David, the issues #8567 "Change iconv so it builds on Cygwin and
> Solaris only" seems to have a fix
Rado and Kevin,
Very nice! With the vertex numbers turned on, it takes me back. But
we never dared do the dynamic layout (which is both fun and useful).
Some goofyness with loops. Add a loop or two, then adjust vertex size
with sliders and the loops seem to go away. This is reproducible for
m
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 at 04:44PM -0700, Rado wrote:
> Thanks to Kevin (one of William's undergrad students), we have some
> major improvements to the graph editor. Take it for spin at
> http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~rkirov2/js-graph-editor/ (a Sage patch will
> follow soon). I have only tested it in Fire
Thanks to Kevin (one of William's undergrad students), we have some
major improvements to the graph editor. Take it for spin at
http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~rkirov2/js-graph-editor/ (a Sage patch will
follow soon). I have only tested it in Firefox on Linux so interested
to hear if anybody has some pro
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 05:58:59PM -0700, Alec Mihailovs wrote:
> > Dan Bump recently raised the issue that the `lattice` method for Weyl
> > groups is badly named. I agree, but the issue is more general. Hence,
> > here is a call for good names.
> >
> > Let P be a parent endowed with a natural act
Burcin--
Now that I've managed to divide the discussion between two groups, I
should try to help organize the mess I made.
Ondrej mentioned in the sage-support discussion that he's opened
ticket 8564. Unfortunately I don't understand the plumbing well
enough to know if 8564 and 8565 are addressi
Hi!
By lack of decision for the moment, I postponed the change to a later
ticket, I just uploaded on trac a minimal version of my patch which
just lets IntegerModRing use its categories, without upgrading its
category to Fields(): see
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8562
Hi!
Here are three little algebra&categories patches on trac to review:
- #8576: Categories for QQ, CC, RR and friends
- #8562: Categories for IntegerMod rings
- #8579: Add the categories of magmas and additive magmas
They are good picks if you want to get into the category business.
2010/3/22 YURi KARADZhOV :
> I played around with sage and found some problems with desolve command.
> To solve ode diff(y(x),x)+a*y(x)+b*x+c we should first define variables and
> functions
>
> x = var('x')
>
> a,b,c=var('a b c')
>
> y=function('y',x)
>
> eq=diff(y,x)+a*y+b*x+c
>
> but than unles
Thank you for reporting this.
I think Robert Marik is the best person to reply to this
issue. I guess he is busy now but I hope he will reply in a
fairly soon and give his opinion.
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:26 AM, YURi KARADZhOV
wrote:
> I played around with sage and found some problems with des
On Mar 22, 1:32 pm, Mike Hansen wrote:
> This is http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8567. You can fix
> the problem by replacing the gd spkg with the one found here:
You mean the *iconv* spkg.
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/iconv/iconv-1.13.1.p0.spkg
--
John
--
To pos
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:36 PM, ggrafendorfer
wrote:
> Thank you Mike,
>
> that was probably the fastest answer ever!!
>
> however, I'm sorry for the post, I should have looked if it was
> reported before,
No worries :-)
--Mike
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroup
Thank you Mike,
that was probably the fastest answer ever!!
however, I'm sorry for the post, I should have looked if it was
reported before,
Georg
On Mar 22, 9:32 pm, Mike Hansen wrote:
> This ishttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8567. You can fix
> the problem by replacing the gd sp
This is http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8567 . You can fix
the problem by replacing the gd spkg with the one found here:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/iconv/iconv-1.13.1.p0.spkg
--Mike
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
William was keen that a new release was made quickly to fix the issues
which prevent 4.3.4 building on several linux distros.
A patch is here:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8567
If that is added, Sage should build ok on these linux distros, which
otherwise d
William was keen that a new release was made quickly to fix the issues which
prevent 4.3.4 building on several linux distros.
A patch is here:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8567
If that is added, Sage should build ok on these linux distros, which otherwise
do not like it when ther
Congrats Minh, thanks for all your persistence hard work!
On Mar 21, 2010, at 11:14 AM, William Stein wrote:
Hello,
After much discussion, a secret committee has made the following
announcement:
-
Minh Van Nguyen is an integral part of the Sage deve
Hi Yuri,
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:58 AM, yuri.k wrote:
> Unfortunately I have not enough resources to pay significant attention
> to sage (despite I really want to). At least I can solve first problem
> with desolve, but I still need some help to understand how to select
> and check specific par
I run 'standard_packages()' for version 4.3.4.rc0 where all doctests passed
(including the long ones). I find however 4 standard packages are uninstalled.
drkir...@redstart:~/sage-4.3.4.rc0$ ./sage
--
| Sage Version 4.3.4.rc0, R
Well done, Minh!
By the way, as this is a Spies price, so you can call yourself a
Master Spy!
(on the second thought, in one of languages I know "spies" means
"kebab"... :-))
(Jaap, neemt je mij niet kwalijk, AJB :-))
Best,
Dima
On Mar 22, 2:14 am, William Stein wrote:
> Hello,
>
> After muc
Dima Pasechnik wrote:
actually, sage: standard_packages()
says that the following standard spkg's are not installed in a t2
build of sage-4.3.4 I made.
['cddlib-094f.p5', 'flintqs-20070817.p4', 'gfan-0.4plus',
'moin-1.9.1.p1', 'palp-1.1.p1', 'pil-1.1.6.p2',
'polytopes_db-20100210', 'sagetex-2.2.
actually, sage: standard_packages()
says that the following standard spkg's are not installed in a t2
build of sage-4.3.4 I made.
['cddlib-094f.p5', 'flintqs-20070817.p4', 'gfan-0.4plus',
'moin-1.9.1.p1', 'palp-1.1.p1', 'pil-1.1.6.p2',
'polytopes_db-20100210', 'sagetex-2.2.3.p0', 'scipy-0.7.p4',
'
so .so files are missing in that build:
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/ff2964972f59429a
On Mar 22, 3:06 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
> Minh Nguyen wrote:
> > Hi folks,
>
> > A binary of Sage 4.3.4 for SPARC Solaris 10 on the machine t2.math is
> > available at
>
Hi all,
scipy is not compiled in that build, despite it being a standard package.
It just won't build by default on Solaris (while it builds there if I do
sage -f scipy-0.7.p4.spkg, etc).
This is not only the issue with this build by Minh,
but I also see this when I build sage myself on t2.
This
I played around with sage and found some problems with desolve command.
To solve ode diff(y(x),x)+a*y(x)+b*x+c we should first define variables and
functions
x = var('x')
a,b,c=var('a b c')
y=function('y',x)
eq=diff(y,x)+a*y+b*x+c
but than unless it is obvious that the dependent variable is x
Hi Yuri,
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:54 PM, YURi KARADZhOV
wrote:
> I'm interested in participating in Sage 2010 GSoC project.
I regret to say that Sage has not been accepted as a mentoring
organization for GSoC 2010. Burcin informed us of this at this
sage-devel thread [1]. However, we still
This is the same document I sent before but with right format.
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dsvkx4j_8dz2gzrdx
--
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
Hi Burcin,
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
> - replace the "GSoC 2010" link on the front page of the web site with
> a "Help Wanted" or "Get Involved!" link.
I have renamed the link "GSoC 2010" to "Get Involved!". This new link
still points to the wiki page on Sage's G
Hello:
I am a PhD student of the Kiev Institute of Mathematics, National Academy of
Science, Ukraine. I have an honors master's degree in mathematical physics
and computer sciences.
I'm interested in participating in *Sage 2010 GSoC* project. I've read the
ideas which were proposed on your websit
Hi Nathann,
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Well, here is my problem... If you have some idea to tackle it... :-)
I just want to say that what you are doing is rather novel at least to
me. Is it possible to draw some inspiration from the interface to the
Sloane online
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:14 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Hello,
>
> After much discussion, a secret committee has made the following
> announcement:
>
> -
>
> Minh Van Nguyen is an integral part of the Sage development effort.
> He is awarded the 2010 Spies
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:03 AM, Martin Albrecht
wrote:
> I wrote the small finite field class and added the int_repr() and forgot to
> add something equivalent for bigger fields. I would suggest to add a new
> function to both called integer_representation() (or so) and deprecate the
Hi,
On a positive note. I was able to build Sage 4.3.4 and run long tests
(all passed) on:
1. x86 - Scientific Linux 5.1
2. AMD64 - Ubuntu 10.4 (beta 1)
Adam
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsub
Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi folks,
A binary of Sage 4.3.4 for SPARC Solaris 10 on the machine t2.math is
available at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-4.3.4/sage-4.3.4-t2.math.washington.edu-sun4v-SunOS.tar.gz
Here is a summary of how I produced that binary.
(1) I logged into t2.ma
38 matches
Mail list logo
