On Apr 2, 2011, at 06:20 , Bill Hart wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 31, 8:41 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
>> On 3/31/11 2:09 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>> +1 to everything you said. Also, I'd like to point out that since many
>> upstream developers lurk on this and other Sage lists, our "colloquial"
>> conversati
I've built Sage tons of time on OpenSolaris as a 32-bit application, and rarely
had any problems for the last 6 months or so. In fact, I've built
sage-4.7.alpha3 several times without issue.
znpoly is a slightly unusual .spkg in Sage, in that it runs a minimal test suite
irrespective of the se
On 04/ 3/11 05:39 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Now there is a repository for the root of Sage, so files like README.txt
are now under revision control
drkirkby@hawk:~/sage-4.7.alpha3$ hg status
drkirkby@hawk:~/sage-4.7.alpha3$
John Palmieri has suggested that the spkg/base repository be removed.
Now there is a repository for the root of Sage, so files like README.txt are now
under revision control
drkirkby@hawk:~/sage-4.7.alpha3$ hg status
drkirkby@hawk:~/sage-4.7.alpha3$
John Palmieri has suggested that the spkg/base repository be removed. This seems
a sensible idea to me. Just merge
On 04/ 2/11 11:47 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 4/2/11 4:33 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
With a slightly hacked version of 4.7.alpha3, I get the following
doctest failures:
**
File
"/export/home/drkirkby/try/sage-4.7.alpha2/devel/sa
Yup, this is a great idea. You were working on this during sage days
29, right? Any progress?
-Keshav
On Mar 24, 3:14 am, koffie wrote:
> Since we have a highly configurable bug tracking system, why not add
> some custom fields?
>
> http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracTicketsCustomFields
>
> On Ma
Indeed. Mercurial's workflow is not really supposed to be carried out
by sending patches to people (the encouraged behavior is to use `hg
pull` from other people's repositories), so the default patch / export
format only includes a subset of the total information so that it can
be backwards compati
On 4/2/11 4:20 PM, Francois Bissey wrote:
> With a slightly hacked version of 4.7.alpha3, I get the following doctest
> failures:
>
> **
> File
>
"/export/home/drkirkby/try/sage-4.7.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/plot/plot3d/para
On 4/2/11 4:33 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
With a slightly hacked version of 4.7.alpha3, I get the following
doctest failures:
**
File
"/export/home/drkirkby/try/sage-4.7.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/plot/plot3d/parametric_surface.pyx
On 2 April 2011 22:20, Francois Bissey wrote:
>> With a slightly hacked version of 4.7.alpha3, I get the following doctest
>> failures:
>>
>> **
>> File
>>
>> "/export/home/drkirkby/try/sage-4.7.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/plot/plot3d/
> With a slightly hacked version of 4.7.alpha3, I get the following doctest
> failures:
>
> **
> File
> "/export/home/drkirkby/try/sage-4.7.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/plot/plot3d/para
> metric_surface.pyx", line 180:
> sage: s[:2
On Saturday, April 2, 2011 1:08:51 PM UTC-4, robertwb wrote:
>
> I think the key point is that there are several metrics for judging
> code.
>
While there certainly is some artistic quality to what constitutes
"beautiful code", surely we can agree that code that relies on
implementation details
On 1 April 2011 17:07, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:20 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>>> See (or don't) #11102 and #11103. Now they're creating new tickets,
>>> not just comments. Hopefully someone can get rid of them.
>>
>> They'
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 8:18 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
> On 2 April 2011 14:20, Bill Hart wrote:
>
>> Please also bear in mind that many "upstream" developers have put
>> years of their life into research, development of algorithms and
>> coding. Many of them are professional mathematicians, not com
On 04/ 2/11 12:57 PM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi David,
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
Agreed, though that is obvious from the release schedule.
But may not be obvious from the standard documentation that one reads.
How many and which type of people actually closely fol
On 2 April 2011 14:20, Bill Hart wrote:
> Please also bear in mind that many "upstream" developers have put
> years of their life into research, development of algorithms and
> coding. Many of them are professional mathematicians, not computer
> scientists or professional programmers. They live a
Hi,
since 4.7 is about adding SPKGs I'm wondering if that could motivate someone
to finish the review of
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9562
which is about fast linear algebra over small extensions of GF(2). It was
agreed ages ago that M4RIE (the new library which implements this
On Mar 31, 8:41 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 3/31/11 2:09 PM, kcrisman wrote:
> +1 to everything you said. Also, I'd like to point out that since many
> upstream developers lurk on this and other Sage lists, our "colloquial"
> conversations actually are heard by many upstream developers. Even
Hi David,
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 10:35 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> Agreed, though that is obvious from the release schedule.
But may not be obvious from the standard documentation that one reads.
How many and which type of people actually closely follow the release
schedule?
> So does this m
On 04/ 2/11 11:06 AM, Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi David,
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
Is this really necessary? Would it not be better to have just put a start
date?
Yes. It shows that a project is still active
Agreed, though that is obvious from the release schedule.
With a slightly hacked version of 4.7.alpha3, I get the following doctest
failures:
**
File
"/export/home/drkirkby/try/sage-4.7.alpha2/devel/sage/sage/plot/plot3d/parametric_surface.pyx",
line 180:
sage: s[:2]
Expected:
On 04/ 1/11 11:46 PM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 17:20:57 +0100
"Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
On 04/ 1/11 12:54 PM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:37:46 +0100
"Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
I've built Sage 64-bit on OpenSolaris but it crashes at startup. I've
run gdb and
On 04/ 1/11 11:02 PM, jonha...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Dave,
That's weird. Now the test seems to pass. I had tried it several
times before I wrote, but now it consistently passes. I'm now a
little worried about the stability of my system... Any ideas about
what can cause these problems (and te
23 matches
Mail list logo
