On Wednesday, September 21, 2011 11:26:39 AM UTC-7, Felix Salfelder wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 09:11:57AM -0700, Tom Boothby wrote:
> > I capitulate on the hidden file idea, in favor of putting 'em in
> > ~/.sage/ though one might note that we're exchanging one hidden file
> > for another
Hi again!
On Sep 21, 8:24 am, Simon King wrote:
>> sage: tord = TermOrder(matrix([3,2,4,1,1,0,1,0,0]))
>> sage: S.=PolynomialRing(QQ)
>> sage: R. = PolynomialRing(S,'x',3,order=tord)
>> sage: (x^2).degree()
>> 2
>
> I think that's a bug.
What about this?
sage: tord = TermOrder(matrix([3,2,4,1,1
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 09:11:57AM -0700, Tom Boothby wrote:
> I capitulate on the hidden file idea, in favor of putting 'em in
> ~/.sage/ though one might note that we're exchanging one hidden file
> for another ;)
i agree. prefixing a dot is not quite a solution as i thought yesterday.
putting
On Wednesday, September 21, 2011 5:57:37 PM UTC+1, Maarten Derickx wrote:
>
> And there was also a project who used the sage spkg system but I can't seem
> to find it anymore :(.
>
You probably mean http://femhub.org
>
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To
Sounds very interesting. When digging up some old discussion on sage devel
[1][2] on this subject I saw you already know Robert Bradshaw who was also
thinking about using Nix for sage package management our implementing
something similar ourselves. And from the old discussion it seems that there
I capitulate on the hidden file idea, in favor of putting 'em in
~/.sage/ though one might note that we're exchanging one hidden file
for another ;)
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 6:47 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:46:03 PM UTC-7, Tom wrote:
>>
>> +1 to .file.py, since it
I've no new arguments to add. But a really big +1 for not making the files
hidden and also not storing them in a different place. Id like to also keep
the alphabetical ordering intact but don't find it very important.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To uns
On Sep 21, 7:09 am, Stan Schymanski wrote:
> sage: var('T_a')
> or
> sage: T_a = var('T_a')
>
> but William's example does not work if I do
> sage: var2('T_a', 'Air temperature (K)')
> ??
You're well underway with the question-marks, but instead of writing
them on a separate line in an email you
Thanks, Nils!
The following question probably belongs to sage-support, but it is
directly related:
It does not seem to make a difference whether I do
sage: var('T_a')
or
sage: T_a = var('T_a')
but William's example does not work if I do
sage: var2('T_a', 'Air temperature (K)')
instead of
sage
Hi!
On 21 Sep., 11:05, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> sage: tord = TermOrder(matrix([3,2,4,1,1,0,1,0,0]))
> sage: S.=PolynomialRing(QQ)
> sage: R. = PolynomialRing(S,'x',3,order=tord)
> sage: (x^2).degree()
> 2
I think that's a bug.
> So the behavior is not consistent among different backend engines, nam
Hi there,
as you might have noticed I have been working on dense linear algebra over
GF(2^e) where 2 <= e <= 10, cf.
https://bitbucket.org/malb/m4rie
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9562
The code comes together nicely and it seems we're beating everything else out
there by a cons
Hi,
Look at this.
sage: tord = TermOrder(matrix([3,2,4,1,1,0,1,0,0]))
sage: S.=PolynomialRing(QQ)
sage: R. = PolynomialRing(S,'x',3,order=tord)
sage: (x^2).degree()
2
So the behavior is not consistent among different backend engines, namely,
Singular and PolyDict. I think degree() should retur
Yet again, the issue of distributing scientific Python software was
raised, this time on the mpi4py mailing list. Since that wasn't really
the right forum, and we weren't really sure what was the right forum, we
started a blog instead.
The idea is to get a diverse set of people describe their
On Wednesday, 21 September 2011 15:21:00 UTC+8, Nicolas M. Thiéry wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 08:11:39AM -0700, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> >In my case, sometimes keeping multiplication coefficients, even in a
> > sparse form, is less efficient than recomputing them over and over
> aga
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 08:11:39AM -0700, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>In my case, sometimes keeping multiplication coefficients, even in a
> sparse form, is less efficient than recomputing them over and over again,
>from a set of sparse matrix generators.
I am confused. When you say "set o
15 matches
Mail list logo
