Hi,
about a year ago I got a permission from Jens (CCed) who wrote the file:
http://hg.sagemath.org/sage-main/file/tip/sage/functions/wigner.py
to use his (original) code in SymPy and license it as BSD. We just got
more people interested in that, so we'd like to port it now. So I
thought I would
Hi William,
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 03:13:33 +0200, William Stein wrote:
> I posted the slides from my short talk "Sage & Singular" here:
>
>
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/days23.5/schedule?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=stein.pdf
Thanks for posting these. There's a small typo in "approaches"
Hi William!
Thanks. I wanted to ask you for them, as I will arrive after 11am.
I have an remark:
IMHO, Singulars Groebner basis computation is already more than
competetive to Maple
in general and to Magma over finite fields.
Cheers,
Michael
On Jul 14, 3:13 am, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
The following are from the thread "sage-4.5.rc0 released" on sage-release.
On 07/12/2010 03:54 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> On 07/12/10 09:47 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>> Right, this was one of the patches to allow for parallel spkg
>> building. Without it, the ecl build could fail. Dave, have
Hi,
I posted the slides from my short talk "Sage & Singular" here:
http://wiki.sagemath.org/days23.5/schedule?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=stein.pdf
William
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--
To post to this group, send an email to
On 14 July 2010 01:23, William Stein wrote:
> There was one talk about Labview. It's also a sort of "visual
> programming language".
Yes.
> I got the strong impression that it is
> something people who don't know how to program use, and something
> people who *do* know how to program (even a l
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 2:48 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
> On 14 July 2010 00:49, William Stein wrote:
>> Hi Sage Developers,
>>
>> I'm setting the Sage-5.0 target date for August 31, 2010 (see
>> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/milestone/sage-5.0). The goals
>> are:
>>
>> 1. Windows port via Cy
On 14 July 2010 00:49, William Stein wrote:
> Hi Sage Developers,
>
> I'm setting the Sage-5.0 target date for August 31, 2010 (see
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/milestone/sage-5.0). The goals
> are:
>
> 1. Windows port via Cygwin:
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/wiki/CygwinPort
>
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 2:17 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
> On 11 July 2010 11:20, William Stein wrote:
>
>> 2. Sage at EuroScipy:
>>
>> Another thing -- though most talks mention Cython, not one single talk
>> given about actual engineers/scientists doing work even mentioned Sage
>> -- and there were
On 11 July 2010 11:20, William Stein wrote:
> 2. Sage at EuroScipy:
>
> Another thing -- though most talks mention Cython, not one single talk
> given about actual engineers/scientists doing work even mentioned Sage
> -- and there were over 30 talks. Perhaps there is no penetration at
> all of S
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:57 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 1:42 AM, Maurizio wrote:
[...]
>> The problem I see now regarding scientific computing, is the not so
>> seamless integration of numpy-scipy: do you think SAGE may improve
>> numpy arrays management with cleaner synta
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 1:42 AM, Maurizio wrote:
> I just spend a couple of words about IDEs. I've personally spent a
> decent amount of time on Spyder and Eric, and my impressions are:
> - Eric is very well suited for general software development, it is not
> completely polished, and it lacks (at
Hi Sage Developers,
I'm setting the Sage-5.0 target date for August 31, 2010 (see
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/milestone/sage-5.0). The goals
are:
1. Windows port via Cygwin: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/wiki/CygwinPort
2. Upgrade PARI to svn: #9343
3. Upgrade MPIR to version 2.x:
I just spend a couple of words about IDEs. I've personally spent a
decent amount of time on Spyder and Eric, and my impressions are:
- Eric is very well suited for general software development, it is not
completely polished, and it lacks (at least explicitly, I didn't get
those) useful features for
On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 5:38 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Cool. There are numerous parameters one could imagine a nagbot
> having. E.g,. max emails per week, how often messages sent, etc.,
> which should be easily customized by each recipient. Ideas? Please
> suggest them.
It should keep track
On 13 jul, 00:12, Rob Beezer wrote:
> I finally got a chance to test this on a clean 64-bit Ubuntu 10.04
> (lucid) install.
>
> I began by apt-get'ing the icedtea6-plugin, which pulls in a lot of
> other packages such as the OpenJDK version of Java. A simple 3d plot
> would not render in JMOL in
I see, there is an inheritance chain
QuotientRing_generic -> IntegerModRing_generic ->
FiniteField_prime_modn
and they all circumvent the "official" coercion model. That at least
explains why polynomials over finite fields break when changing
QuotientRing_generic!
Volker
--
To post to this gro
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:36 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 1, 10:30 am, Jason Grout wrote:
>> Is there an easy way to make this work?
>>
>> % sage -R
>>
>> R version 2.10.1 (2009-12-14)
>> Copyright (C) 2009 The R Foundation for Statistical Computing
>> ISBN 3-900051-07-0
>>
>> R is free softwa
On 2010-Jul-12 12:27:57 +0200, Robert Miller wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Simon King wrote:
>> If "providing resolution" and "closing" is the same, then I recently
>> closed a ticket out of ignorance.
>
>They are indeed the same. Which ticket was it?
Likewise, I just did the same to
> I am sorry for that.
Don't be!
Just to be perfectly clear, I'm not trying to be totalitarian here. I
think the following is a good rule of thumb:
If there is anything on the ticket that needs to be merged, even if it
is part of another ticket or implied by another ticket, or there is
anyone ar
Hi Robert,
On 12 Jul., 12:27, Robert Miller wrote:
> > If "providing resolution" and "closing" is the same, then I recently
> > closed a ticket out of ignorance.
>
> They are indeed the same. Which ticket was it?
#2151.
I am sorry for that. At least, there is no code attached to that
ticket, an
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> I think indexing into operands by number is a bit brittle, and
> x.operands()[2] is much more explicit.
On the other hand, then you get expressions like
x.operands()[0].operands()[2].operands()[1].operands()[0]
which are a bit unwieldy e
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:52:24 -0700
> Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>
>> > As for syntax, I think the slice syntax is clever and fairly
>> > intuitive. I can also understand using brackets to access operands
>> > in an expression.
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> 2) sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/libs/galrep/wrapper.pyx"
>
> Andrew Sutherland's Probabilistic Image of Galois Algorithm
>
> AUTHOR:
>
> - William Stein, 2010-03 -- wrote the Cython wrapper
> - Sutherland -- wrote the C code and desi
There are two doctest failures on t2.math which are both quite recent. I'm not
100% sure if they are new to 4.5.rc0, or whether they existed in 4.4.4 too. The
two failures are
1) sage -t -long "devel/sage/doc/en/thematic_tutorials/group_theory.rst"
=
Group Theory and Sage
=
On Jul 13, 3:37 am, Carl Witty wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> > Unsurprisingly, setting the random seed makes the random_expr() always
> > return the same value:
>
> > sage: set_random_seed(0xdeadbeef)
> > sage: random_expr(5)
> > tanh(-pi^real_part(v1)*sin(log(pi
I'd say that's in the sagenb package.
You can use the instructions at:
http://nb.sagemath.org/dev.html
Specifically, the file interact.py contains a funciont called
interact, and then you'd have to read also the javascript part, which
is possibly in the file notebook_lib.js, around:
function se
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> Unsurprisingly, setting the random seed makes the random_expr() always
> return the same value:
>
> sage: set_random_seed(0xdeadbeef)
> sage: random_expr(5)
> tanh(-pi^real_part(v1)*sin(log(pi)*imag_part(v1)))
> sage: set_random_seed(0xdeadbee
On 13 July 2010 06:14, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> 3) The Sage library.
>> Is it really necessary for endless calls to
>>
>> python `which cython`
>>
>> to all be run serially? Could these be done in parallel?
>
> They are run in parallel.
Good
>> BTW, the use of 'which' is not a good idea. Firs
Hi Robert,
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:52:24 -0700
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > As for syntax, I think the slice syntax is clever and fairly
> > intuitive. I can also understand using brackets to access operands
> > in an expression. Personally, I think the brackets make more sense
> > for indexing,
30 matches
Mail list logo
