On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Oct 28, 4:23 am, "Georg S. Weber"
> wrote:
>> > (1) Have a Python library called "sagecore", which is just the most
>> > important standard spkg's (e.g., Singular, PARI, etc.), perhaps
>> > eventually built *only* as shared object
Fixed. This was left over from migrating away from a virtual machine...
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> Hello,
>
> From time to time I make a mistake and go to sagemath.com instead of
> sagemath.org. What exactly is the first of these sites? It seems to be
> like an
http://sagemath.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-to-referee-sage-trac-tickets.html
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+uns
Hello,
>From time to time I make a mistake and go to sagemath.com instead of
sagemath.org. What exactly is the first of these sites? It seems to be
like an old copy of the second one, is there any reason for this?
Thank you,
Andrey
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegro
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 06:44:01AM -0700, mhs wrote:
> Hi SAGE developers,
>
> I have a question regarding quotient fields of polynomial rings. I
> want to iterate a polynomial in two variables over a finite field and
> need to mod out higher powers. So I defined a finite field, a
> polynomial rin
It's just a question of __call__ not being defined. It should be really
easy to fix. I suggest making a trac ticket and then looking at
sage.rings.polynomial.polynomial_quotient_ring_element and defining __call__
to do function composition. Make sure you raise a TypeError if the input is
an elem
On 31 Okt., 11:53, David Kirkby wrote:
> It might be useful if a test could be marked in some way with the
> release it was last changed in. Then add a target to the makefile
> which tests all new or changed tests 1000 times, but does not test
> the old tests.
Feel free to write a script (or pro
Hi SAGE developers,
I have a question regarding quotient fields of polynomial rings. I
want to iterate a polynomial in two variables over a finite field and
need to mod out higher powers. So I defined a finite field, a
polynomial ring, a quotient ring and a polynomial in it:
F.=FiniteField(5)
R.=
On 10/31/2010 01:18:52 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
On 31 October 2010 01:25, Mike Witt wrote:
> I guess I don't really understand what this is all about. But I
> suppose that the major factor is that I simply wouldn't be available
> more than once in a while to perform whatever these administration
On 30 October 2010 23:47, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 10/30/10 10:20 AM, Oscar Lazo wrote:
>>
>
>> Making solution_dict the default seems apropiate for find_fit and
>> solve. I still would prefer a symbolic result for find_fit though (at
>> least an option to get that). Usually when one fits some data
The problem with devel/sage/sage/libs/fplll/fplll.pyx got me thinking.
It might be useful if a test could be marked in some way with the
release it was last changed in. Then add a target to the makefile
which tests all new or changed tests 1000 times, but does not test
the old tests. If 50 or so
On 10/31/2010 04:52 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
> On 31 October 2010 00:09, David Kirkby wrote:
>
>> So far all passes of 1202 runs on OpenSolaris.
>>
>> This is with very latest alpha I managed to find (sage-4.6.1.alpha0).
>> I'll try it with 4.6.rc0 too.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
> I got a number of failure
On 31 October 2010 09:52, David Kirkby wrote:
> python: can't open file '/export/home/drkirkby/.sage//tmp/fplll.py':
I just realised why. The doctest is writing to $HOME/.sage. But I was
doctests two versions of Sage (one based on 4.6.rc0, and another based
on sage-4.6.1.alpha0. These were both
On 31 Okt., 02:00, Mitesh Patel wrote:
> On 10/30/2010 06:09 PM, David Kirkby wrote:
> > On 30 October 2010 23:55, Mitesh Patel wrote:
> "/Users/buildbot/build/sage/bsd-2/bsd_64_full/build/sage-4.6.0pre0/devel/sa
> ge/sage/libs/fplll/fplll.pyx", line 853:
> sage: L.echelon_form(
On 31 October 2010 00:09, David Kirkby wrote:
> So far all passes of 1202 runs on OpenSolaris.
>
> This is with very latest alpha I managed to find (sage-4.6.1.alpha0).
> I'll try it with 4.6.rc0 too.
>
> Dave
>
I got a number of failures, though not in the way you do.
On sage-4.6.rc0 I get
38
Hi folks,
Sage is mentioned in the following IT article:
http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/7-programming-languages-the-rise-620
See especially this page:
http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/7-programming-languages-the-rise-620?page=0,2
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
--
To post t
On 31 October 2010 01:25, Mike Witt wrote:
> I guess I don't really understand what this is all about. But I
> suppose that the major factor is that I simply wouldn't be available
> more than once in a while to perform whatever these administration
> tasks might be. That doesn't seem to factor in
On Oct 30, 11:05 pm, Jan Groenewald wrote:
[...]
> Can sage safely delete older copies before making a new 70M copy?
> I can symlink to local scratch space, not hundreds of stuidents who move
> between machines though.
>
> Can this go in /tmp instead?
See http://common-lisp.net/project/asdf/asdf/
18 matches
Mail list logo
