Hi sage-devel, I'm having a problem with sagenb and it told me to post
here.
I'm running:
Ubuntu 10.04LTS on
hp DualCore6300 w/ 2Gb RAM
sage-4.5.2 binary install in my home with
$SAGE_ROOT:$SAGE_ROOT/local/bin added to my path in .bash_profile
in /usr/local/bin there's also a copy of sage file with
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 1:25 PM, cch wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A live Sage-4.5.2, based on Slax-remix08 with Linux Kernel-2.6.35.1,
> was made.
> Download site:
>
> http://diffusion.cgu.edu.tw/ftp
Thank you for letting us know. I have spread the words on Facebook [1]
and Twitter [2].
[1] http://w
Hi all,
A live Sage-4.5.2, based on Slax-remix08 with Linux Kernel-2.6.35.1,
was made.
Download site:
http://diffusion.cgu.edu.tw/ftp
--
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
Some of the questions you have about "why lisp" are answered in:
http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/Expert-to-Expert-Rich-Hickey-and-Brian-Beckman-Inside-Clojure/
which is about Clojure, a more recent lisp although the ideas are
essentially the same in Common Lisp.
Tim Daly
David Kirkby w
On 9/8/10 7:12 PM, mda_ wrote:
sage: is_even(e)
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for %:
'sage.symbolic.constants_c.E' and 'int'
sage: is_even(float(e))
False
Interesting. The problem seems to be here:
sage: e%2
-
On 9/8/10 6:35 PM, mda_ wrote:
sage: is_triangular_number(0)
0
sage: is_triangular_number(1)
1
sage: is_triangular_number(2)
False
sage: is_triangular_number(3)
2
This is the same duck-typing style choice I made before. Example
where unexpected output is generated:
sage: [x for x in [0..3] if
On Sep 8, 5:12 pm, mda_ wrote:
> sage: is_even(e)
> TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for %:
> 'sage.symbolic.constants_c.E' and 'int'
>
> sage: is_even(float(e))
> False
sage: is_odd(float(e))
True
sage: is_odd(int(e))
False
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegrou
sage: is_even(e)
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for %:
'sage.symbolic.constants_c.E' and 'int'
sage: is_even(float(e))
False
--
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
F
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:35 PM, mda_ wrote:
> The "not" coerces 0 into True, thereby keeping it in the list
> comprehension. Should I file a bug?
According to the documentation for is_triangular_number, you should
use the following test if you want to consider 0 triangular:
sage: [x for x in [
sage: is_triangular_number(0)
0
sage: is_triangular_number(1)
1
sage: is_triangular_number(2)
False
sage: is_triangular_number(3)
2
This is the same duck-typing style choice I made before. Example
where unexpected output is generated:
sage: [x for x in [0..3] if not is_triangular_number(x)]
[0,
On 09/ 8/10 08:44 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2010-09-08 21:33, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
If there's a bug in the code which means it will never build on OS X
10.4, then that's another issue.
I tested sage-4.6.prealpha4 (based on sage-4.5.3, so it includes the GSL
update) on a PPC OS X 10.4 and
On Sep 8, 3:44 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2010-09-08 21:33, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> > If there's a bug in the code which means it will never build on OS X
> > 10.4, then that's another issue.
>
> I tested sage-4.6.prealpha4 (based on sage-4.5.3, so it includes the GSL
> update) on a PPC
On 2010-09-08 21:33, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> If there's a bug in the code which means it will never build on OS X
> 10.4, then that's another issue.
I tested sage-4.6.prealpha4 (based on sage-4.5.3, so it includes the GSL
update) on a PPC OS X 10.4 and all tests were successful (make testlong).
On 09/ 8/10 07:26 PM, mhampton wrote:
Yes, I would guess this is related to
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9533
Looks like that spkg was really well tested in general, but not on a
OS X 10.4 machine. Unfortunately I don't have one available.
-Marshall
Yes,
The GSL update was well
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>>
>> I suppose another point of relevance is that there is a slight possibility
>> that it could also be used in Python for the native Python bignums, which
>> would hopefully make norm
On 2010-Sep-06 21:29:35 +0100, "Dr. David Kirkby"
wrote:
>I would be very weary of any random number generator that claims to be a good
>source of random numbers if the output differs by platform or compilation
>mode.
It depends what you mean by "differs". For "real" random numbers, you
can
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> I suppose another point of relevance is that there is a slight possibility
> that it could also be used in Python for the native Python bignums, which
> would hopefully make normal python integers must faster.
That was the first thing that cr
On 2010-09-08 17:29, John H Palmieri wrote:
> +++ [BUG] Total bench for gp-sta is 3288122
> +++ [BUG] Total bench for gp-dyn is 3363785
>
> PROBLEMS WERE NOTED. The following files list them in diff format:
> Directory: /scratch/palmieri/sage-4.6.prealpha4/spkg/build/
> pari-2.4.3.svn-12577.p5/src
Yes, I would guess this is related to
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9533
Looks like that spkg was really well tested in general, but not on a
OS X 10.4 machine. Unfortunately I don't have one available.
-Marshall
On Sep 8, 12:45 pm, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2010-09-08 14:50, kcri
On 2010-09-08 14:50, kcrisman wrote:
> Mac OS X 10.4 with 512 MB memory, 700 MHz PPC
>
> fails at GSL (this machine built and passed nearly all tests with
> 4.5.2):
I doubt that this has to do with the PARI upgrade (as far as I know, GSL
does not depend on PARI). Does sage-4.5.3 build on that mac
On Sep 7, 6:28 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> On 09/ 7/10 02:57 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
> > This is a problem faced throughout software engineering, of course. I
> > think of the many times in my CS degree where we talked about the
> > necessity of drawing up specs (i.e., tickets) and sticking
Hi everyone!
I saw there exists PyOpenCL, a python Interface for using OpenCL
( http://mathema.tician.de/software/pyopencl )
for GPU Programming.
Short Info for all who don't know it:
OpenCL™ is the first open, royalty-free standard for cross-platform,
parallel programming of modern processors fo
On 09/ 8/10 03:56 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
On 9/7/10 2:35 PM, Bill Hart wrote:
Hi all,
After really a lot of people from Sage related projects and elsewhere
wrote to
me and said they'd support a BSD licensed bignum library, I finally
decid
Following your instructions, all tests passed on two 64-bit linux
machines (they have quite different processors, one is an 8-core intel
i7 860, the other a dual core intel e8400).
-Marshall Hampton
On Sep 7, 5:09 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello sage-devel,
>
> As far as we know, there are no
On Sep 7, 3:09 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello sage-devel,
>
> As far as we know, there are no more remaining issues for the PARI
> update (#9343). We haven't had any doctest failures for a while now.
> The main issues recently have been with PARI not compiling properly on
> various machines, b
Thanks, Ivan!
> Of course, it won't be the ultimate until #8473 is fixed.
>
Speaking of which, it seems like there aren't really major technical
hurdles to this (though someone would have to be very familiar with
the sagenb code). Any ideas?
Also, while exploring this, I found another bug (at
On 9/8/10 9:56 AM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
On 9/7/10 2:35 PM, Bill Hart wrote:
Hi all,
After really a lot of people from Sage related projects and elsewhere
wrote to
me and said they'd support a BSD licensed bignum library, I finally
decided
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 9/7/10 2:35 PM, Bill Hart wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After really a lot of people from Sage related projects and elsewhere
>> wrote to
>> me and said they'd support a BSD licensed bignum library, I finally
>> decided to
>> go ahead with crea
On Wednesday, September 8, 2010, Harald Schilly
wrote:
> On Sep 8, 1:03 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
>> If the ping time to boxen.math.washington.edu is an order of magnitude less
>> than
>> any other mirror ...
>
> I've coded this and back then I thought this is a good idea, but maybe
> it's n
There is a patch up at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9873
implementing the coolest Sage Mac application since the last one. Of course,
it won't be the ultimate until #8473 is fixed.
Since the code is all new, I would appreciate any feedback even if you don't
feel comfortable actual
On 09/ 7/10 11:09 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
Hello sage-devel,
As far as we know, there are no more remaining issues for the PARI
update (#9343). We haven't had any doctest failures for a while now.
The main issues recently have been with PARI not compiling properly on
various machines, but all
Mac OS X 10.4 with 512 MB memory, 700 MHz PPC
fails at GSL (this machine built and passed nearly all tests with
4.5.2):
libtool: link: ar cru .libs/libgslintegration.a .libs/qk15.o .libs/
qk21.o .libs/qk31.o .libs/qk41.o .libs/qk51.o .libs/qk61.o .libs/
qk.o .libs/qng.o .libs/qag.o .libs/qags.o .
On Sep 8, 1:03 am, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> If the ping time to boxen.math.washington.edu is an order of magnitude less
> than
> any other mirror ...
I've coded this and back then I thought this is a good idea, but maybe
it's not. The main objective was to get rid of the hardcoded boxen
serve
Debian 64-bit on an intel core-duo
compiles without problems and passes all doctests. The test wheree
made with only two threads.
--
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 m
On 09/ 8/10 09:57 AM, Dan Drake wrote:
I do get intermittent failures when I run "make ptestlong"; the doctest
will fail with something like this:
sage -t -long devel/sage/sage/structure/proof/all.py
python: can't open file '/home/drake/.sage//tmp/all.py': [Errno 2] No
such file
On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 at 12:09PM +0200, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> As far as we know, there are no more remaining issues for the PARI
> update (#9343). We haven't had any doctest failures for a while now.
> The main issues recently have been with PARI not compiling properly on
> various machines, but a
36 matches
Mail list logo
