On 28 August 2010 04:15, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Ryan Hinton wrote:
>> Any guesses when the snazzy new Cython 0.13 will end up in Sage? I
>> currently have some snazzy C++ code that I want to wrap in Cython
>> (uses namespaces, etc.), and the new features will m
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Ryan Hinton wrote:
> Any guesses when the snazzy new Cython 0.13 will end up in Sage? I
> currently have some snazzy C++ code that I want to wrap in Cython
> (uses namespaces, etc.), and the new features will make it much
> easier.
Soon. It could probably make it
I've converted Tom Judson's open-source Abstract Algebra textbook
(http://abstract.pugetsound.edu) from Latex to a series of Sage worksheets (one
per chapter) with almost no compromises (ie the same source also builds a
faithful PDF). Cross-worksheet links are not supported yet in the notebook,
On 08/27/10 12:59 PM, Tim Daly wrote:
tl;dr we need to raise the standards and "get it right".
On getting different answers...
Some algorithms in computational mathematics use random
values. Depending on the source of random values you might
get different but correct answers. Random algorithms
On 08/27/2010 05:44 PM, Ryan Hinton wrote:
> Any guesses when the snazzy new Cython 0.13 will end up in Sage? I
I don't know, but I've opened
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9828
> currently have some snazzy C++ code that I want to wrap in Cython
> (uses namespaces, etc.), and the new
Any guesses when the snazzy new Cython 0.13 will end up in Sage? I
currently have some snazzy C++ code that I want to wrap in Cython
(uses namespaces, etc.), and the new features will make it much
easier.
Thanks!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To
On Aug 27, 1:56 pm, Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Aug 27, 7:29 am, kcrisman wrote:
>
> > Usually the dummy variables (like in solve()) don't have this
> > problem. I don't think they have a ? in front of them, though. It
> > would be possible to add this to the Maxima parser, I suppose.
>
> This is
On 08/27/10 07:24 PM, mhampton wrote:
For the record, I tried the above calculation at least 250,000 times
on two macs (running OSX 10.5 and 10.6) and on Ubuntu 9.10 with a i7
860 processor, had no errors. This was on Sage-4.5.2. I guess I'll
try again with 4.5.3, maybe its related to the Pari
On 08/27/10 06:33 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:21 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/patches/iconv-1.13.1.p3.spkg
>
> I don't believe there will be any issues with Cygwin, but it would be nice
> to know.
Looks good to me.
--Mike
For the record, I tried the above calculation at least 250,000 times
on two macs (running OSX 10.5 and 10.6) and on Ubuntu 9.10 with a i7
860 processor, had no errors. This was on Sage-4.5.2. I guess I'll
try again with 4.5.3, maybe its related to the Pari upgrade.
Otherwise +1 to Alex's comment
On Aug 27, 7:29 am, kcrisman wrote:
> Usually the dummy variables (like in solve()) don't have this
> problem. I don't think they have a ? in front of them, though. It
> would be possible to add this to the Maxima parser, I suppose.
This is *much* easier to deal with in library mode :-). You ju
On Aug 27, 6:32 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> > Maxima encountered a Lisp error:
>
> > NIL is not of type (OR FILE-STREAM STRING PATHNAME).
If you can launch Maxima by itself, try maxima -g
so you should fall into the Lisp debugger when you
run into that error. What does :backtrace report?
> I made
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:21 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/patches/iconv-1.13.1.p3.spkg
>
> I don't believe there will be any issues with Cygwin, but it would be nice
> to know.
Looks good to me.
--Mike
--
To post to this group, send an email to sag
I split these problems into three tickets, now trac #9823, #9824, and
#9825. My knowledge and need are not great enough for me to dig into
these at the moment, but at least they are in the system now. :-)
- Ryan
On Aug 27, 6:05 am, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
> Both desolve_system and desolve_lap
On Aug 27, 8:29 am, kcrisman wrote:
> Usually the dummy variables (like in solve()) don't have this
> problem. I don't think they have a ? in front of them, though. It
> would be possible to add this to the Maxima parser, I suppose.
In Maxima a symbol such as foo is represented by
the Lisp sym
On Aug 27, 8:23 am, "ma...@mendelu.cz" wrote:
> Hm, the things are not as simple as I originaly thought. Your ?g1543
> seems to be a dummy variable, which is used by Maxima. Do not know how
> to support it in Sage.
Usually the dummy variables (like in solve()) don't have this
problem. I don't
Great, thanks! I will try to take a look today.
david
On Aug 27, 1:43 am, David Roe wrote:
> So, I have a patch up at #9814 which improves the situation.
--
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
On 26 srp, 23:25, Ryan Hinton wrote:
> I am having trouble trying to use desolve_system. Am I doing
> something wrong? If not, I can create trac tickets for these errors.
>
> 1. If I make the reference manual example easier, I get an exception:
>
> sage: t = var('t')
> sage: x = function('x',
On 8/27/10 7:15 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
I have a campus sage server setup in which I use the server_pool option.
My sage directory is rw for the notebook server, but only readable for
the server_pool users. I'm having a problem starting maxima from the
server_pool users:
sageser...@sage:~$ ssh sa
Hm, the things are not as simple as I originaly thought. Your ?g1543
seems to be a dummy variable, which is used by Maxima. Do not know how
to support it in Sage.
This is our example 3 in Maxima
Maxima 5.21.1 http://maxima.sourceforge.net
using Lisp CLISP 2.44.1 (2008-02-23)
Distributed under the
I have a campus sage server setup in which I use the server_pool option.
My sage directory is rw for the notebook server, but only readable for
the server_pool users. I'm having a problem starting maxima from the
server_pool users:
sageser...@sage:~$ ssh sa...@localhost # ssh into one of the
Both desolve_system and desolve_laplace use Maxima's function desolve.
Desolve_laplace has been updated in 2009, but desolve_system not. I
believe that desolve_system could be improved in the same way as
desolve_laplace. Please, make a trac report and put me (robert.marik)
into Cc field. Thanks
Ro
tl;dr we need to raise the standards and "get it right".
On getting different answers...
Some algorithms in computational mathematics use random
values. Depending on the source of random values you might
get different but correct answers. Random algorithms can
be very much faster than determinis
(Sigh... And I had promised myself not to get involved in this thread...)
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:03:08 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
> On 08/27/10 09:17 AM, John Cremona wrote:
> > On 27 August 2010 07:25, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> >>
> >> My own view is I'd rather have something with less
I have added a new ticket for adding a default gcd and lcm for field
elements.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9819
For the case of field elements gcd and lcm methods are not of great
interest. However, they can be addecuated for some reasons.
- Some algorithms may accept as input eith
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/patches/iconv-1.13.1.p3.spkg
is an update of the iconv package. The upstream source has not changed (we have
the latest version), but it now builds in parallel, so will install faster. I've
checked the parallel building
* 127 times on OpenSolaris
On 08/27/10 10:17 AM, John Cremona wrote:
wait a minute. I did not really look at the code, and I know nothing
about it at all. The short glance I took at the trace showed me that
I did not understand it at all, and I do not propose to spend more
time looking at it. (That is not because I do n
wait a minute. I did not really look at the code, and I know nothing
about it at all. The short glance I took at the trace showed me that
I did not understand it at all, and I do not propose to spend more
time looking at it. (That is not because I do not care about code
quality and correctness,
On 08/27/10 09:17 AM, John Cremona wrote:
On 27 August 2010 07:25, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
On 08/24/10 02:06 PM, kcrisman wrote:
Anyway, I think (as you have correctly noted before) we have a bit of
a culture clash between software engineering and mathematics.
Just have patience with th
On 27 August 2010 07:25, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> On 08/24/10 02:06 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, I think (as you have correctly noted before) we have a bit of
>> a culture clash between software engineering and mathematics.
>
>
>
>
>> Just have patience with those of us who aren't from a so
30 matches
Mail list logo
