Hi,
I am new to Sage and I am interested to participate in the development work
of Sage. I would like to understand the codes of Sage.
I would like to know if there is any high level architectural design
document on Sage. I can find fragments of information related to this, e.g.
- Sage use so
Hi,
I would like to know if Sage will go to implement some specific module for
application ?
e.g. Signal processing, Bioinformatics, Queuing networks, computational
linguistics, etc.
I think implementation of modules in specific areas is worthy to consider.
Currently I do find some in the ma
On 2012-12-01, Greg McWhirter wrote:
> --=_Part_1437_25379457.1354339928090
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> It is a few years old. I don't know if that qualifies it as "old" or not.
> It has dual quad-core Intel Xeons in it I believe.
what does Apple's "about this mac" tel
It is a few years old. I don't know if that qualifies it as "old" or not.
It has dual quad-core Intel Xeons in it I believe. The i7 may be an
artifact of what the 5.0 binary was built on. The 5.4.1 source attempt
thinks the processor is core2 to the best of my ability reading the logs.
- Greg
On 2012-12-01, Greg McWhirter wrote:
> --=_Part_1340_24540346.1354327647430
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> It does error out similarly. I tried it both on a clean source download of
> sage 5.4.1 (forced to use the OS X gcc 4.2 instead of the 4.0.1) and a
> working binary
Kannappan Sampath writes:
> Perhaps, I should explain my rationale for the terms I chose, my
> first preference is `echelonize(v)` (although I wrote it second)
> because, what the function returns amounts to its reduced row echelon
> form, if you think of it as 1 x n matrix.
My rationale for "m
It does error out similarly. I tried it both on a clean source download of
sage 5.4.1 (forced to use the OS X gcc 4.2 instead of the 4.0.1) and a
working binary download of sage 5.0 (using sage's gcc 4.6.3). Log snips are
at the end.
- Greg
Snip from 5.0:
/bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CC --mode=
On Saturday, December 1, 2012 1:57:38 AM UTC+1, Greg McWhirter wrote:
>
> Ah, yes. It was with the older 2.4 (2.4.0.p6). I should have confirmed
> that it was the same one before replying. Sorry for the potential confusion
> there.
>
> At any rate, the last bits of the log are appended below (a
Ah, yes. It was with the older 2.4 (2.4.0.p6). I should have confirmed that
it was the same one before replying. Sorry for the potential confusion
there.
At any rate, the last bits of the log are appended below (and if you need
more, let me know). I'd be happy to help test future changes as wel
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Eviatar wrote:
> I think echelonize is a bit misleading, because it's not really doing
> Gaussian elimination. Besides, I think it would have to be rref to be
> consistent with matrices (it's reduced row echelon form, not simply row
> echelon form):
>
> sage: matr
On Friday, November 30, 2012 11:23:55 PM UTC+1, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> I accidentally noticed that most of the doctests for this module were
> testing the flint implementation instead:
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13781
>
> The patch is straight-forward, but there's a hi
On Friday, November 30, 2012 10:55:12 PM UTC+1, Greg McWhirter wrote:
>
> Unfortunately (for me at least) it is still broken as of this morning. I
> was unable to compile 4.5.1 or upgrade from 5.0 as a result on 10.5. hat
> information would be useful for potentially pursuing a fix?
>
> - Greg
I think echelonize is a bit misleading, because it's not really doing
Gaussian elimination. Besides, I think it would have to be rref to be
consistent with matrices (it's reduced row echelon form, not simply row
echelon form):
sage: matrix([0,3,4]).echelon_form()
[0 3 4]
sage: matrix([0,3,4]).r
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Eviatar wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was planning to work on the patch for this; however, is "normal form"
> known terminology for dividing a vector by the leading entry? A Google
> search returns no such use. Wouldn't it be better for it to be named
> something like div
I accidentally noticed that most of the doctests for this module were
testing the flint implementation instead:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13781
The patch is straight-forward, but there's a hidden issue that the
doctests should have caught:
sage: R. = PolynomialRing(Integers(101
Perhaps, I should explain my rationale for the terms I chose, my first
preference is `echelonize(v)` (although I wrote it second) because, what
the function returns amounts to its reduced row echelon form, if you think
of it as 1 x n matrix.
~KnS.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Keshav Kini wr
On 11/30/12 3:36 PM, Eviatar wrote:
I was planning to work on the patch for this; however, is "normal form"
known terminology for dividing a vector by the leading entry? A Google
search returns no such use. Wouldn't it be better for it to be named
something like divided_by_leading, to remove ambi
Kannappan Sampath writes:
> Here's a "natural" place where I can see this is helpful:
>
> To carry out, Gauss-Jordan like row reductions, where you'd like the
> first non-zero entry in a row (the so-called pivot) to be 1, I think
> this is very helpful.
>
> So, I'd be **for** keeping this, perhap
Here's a "natural" place where I can see this is helpful:
To carry out, Gauss-Jordan like row reductions, where you'd like the first
non-zero entry in a row (the so-called pivot) to be 1, I think this is very
helpful.
So, I'd be **for** keeping this, perhaps in a different name, that would
reflec
Hi,
The sage-root repo seemingly isn't being served correctly, as the
following URL returns an HTTP 500:
http://hg.sagemath.org/sage-root/
-Keshav
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@g
Unfortunately (for me at least) it is still broken as of this morning. I was
unable to compile 4.5.1 or upgrade from 5.0 as a result on 10.5. hat
information would be useful for potentially pursuing a fix?
- Greg McWhirter
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Hello,
I was planning to work on the patch for this; however, is "normal form"
known terminology for dividing a vector by the leading entry? A Google
search returns no such use. Wouldn't it be better for it to be named
something like divided_by_leading, to remove ambiguity and potential
confus
On 30 November 2012 15:53, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, November 30, 2012 6:36:32 AM UTC-5, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>>
>> It's clear there might be legal issues if Mathematica linked to Sage
>> using Mathlink, so I was thinking of sending the email below to both
>> the FSF and Wolfram Research
On 30 November 2012 17:35, Keshav Kini wrote:
> David Kirkby writes:
>> Sage
>>
>> http://www.sagemath.org/
>>
>> is an open-source mathematical package released under the GPL version
>> 2, or if the user wishes, any later version of the GPL.
>
> Well, according to William as of October 2011 in a
On Friday, November 30, 2012 1:21:13 PM UTC-5, KnS wrote:
>
> This is trac #13780 now. Thanks Philipp for reporting here. (I'll submit a
> patch now; but, I am ccing to the sage-devel to ask if issues that are so
> trivial to fix but still can be considered major, deserve a separate
> ticket).
This is trac #13780 now. Thanks Philipp for reporting here. (I'll submit a
patch now; but, I am ccing to the sage-devel to ask if issues that are so
trivial to fix but still can be considered major, deserve a separate
ticket).
Thank you,
~KnS
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:54 PM, Philipp Kerling wr
2012/11/30 David Kirkby
> Sage is an open-source mathematical package released under the GPL
>
I forgot one thing: FSF will kill all of your family if you use the term
"open source". IMHO you should use "free software" so they're happy.
Best regards,
--
*Andrea Lazzarotto* - http://andrealazz
David Kirkby writes:
> Sage
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/
>
> is an open-source mathematical package released under the GPL version
> 2, or if the user wishes, any later version of the GPL.
Well, according to William as of October 2011 in an email to me:
> The complete Sage distribution is GPLv3
2012/11/30 kcrisman
> I guess I don't see the point. Are we really thinking Wolfram would want
> to do that?
I agree. Also, probably the FSF doesn't care a lot about this because
basically they exclude the possibility of existence of any nonfree
software...
--
*Andrea Lazzarotto* - http://an
On Friday, November 30, 2012 5:21:24 PM UTC+1, Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I don't know if the following is related with the recently discussed
> problems in the graph backend or whether it is from one of my dreaded
> "fix memleaks by weak caching" patches - can experts please have a
> look
On Friday, November 30, 2012 8:11:11 AM UTC-8, Nicolas M. Thiéry wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 08:29:16PM -0800, Andrew Mathas wrote:
> >To build the documentation I typically use something like
> >sage -b && sage --docbuild reference html
> >Often this works without a hitch a
Hi!
I don't know if the following is related with the recently discussed
problems in the graph backend or whether it is from one of my dreaded
"fix memleaks by weak caching" patches - can experts please have a
look at #13779 ?
The problem: If one does "export MALLOC_CHECK_=3", then the tests for
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 08:29:16PM -0800, Andrew Mathas wrote:
>To build the documentation I typically use something like
>sage -b && sage --docbuild reference html
>Often this works without a hitch and just as often I get numerous warnings
>like
>categories.rst:44: WARNING: toc
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 4:57 PM, kcrisman wrote:
> I did NOT like rpy/rpy2 syntax, so something preferable to that would be
> helpful.
Yes, it's not so nice, but for me it seems to be quite stable and helpful.
What - in my eyes - also need some mentioning is scikit.learn:
http://scikit-learn.org
On Friday, November 30, 2012 7:28:55 AM UTC-5, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Also, if you look at the statsmodels dependency list (NumPy, SciPy,
> Pandas, Cython, Matplotlib) it seems like it (together with Pandas) would
> fit nicely into our infrastructure. In fact, I think statistics is an area
>
On Friday, November 30, 2012 6:36:32 AM UTC-5, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> It's clear there might be legal issues if Mathematica linked to Sage
> using Mathlink, so I was thinking of sending the email below to both
> the FSF and Wolfram Research. Any comments?
>
>
I guess I don't see the point
On Friday, November 30, 2012 3:50:43 PM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On 2012-11-30, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote:
> > --=_Part_1212_10818395.1354274078891
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > While updating MPIR in #13137, we remarked the old fix f
On 2012-11-30, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
> --=_Part_1212_10818395.1354274078891
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Dear all,
>
> While updating MPIR in #13137, we remarked the old fix for compilation on
> OSX 10.4 (and maybe 10.5) running in 32 bit mode on 64 bit Intel hardware
Also, if you look at the statsmodels dependency list (NumPy, SciPy, Pandas,
Cython, Matplotlib) it seems like it (together with Pandas) would fit
nicely into our infrastructure. In fact, I think statistics is an area
where Sage is lagging.
On Friday, November 30, 2012 12:04:20 PM UTC, jason wr
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> http://pandas.pydata.org/
>
> ... Also, the
> statsmodel package deserves mention: http://statsmodels.sourceforge.net/.
Yes, 100% ack. Google Summer of Code 2013 is coming soon, i.e. Dec.
1st is my (personal) reminder to start digging into tha
On 11/30/12 5:02 AM, Harald Schilly wrote:
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:35:08 PM UTC+1, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Unfortunately, I've never been that impressed with pexpect.
Just for the record, over here in the "Python world", we already have
rpy2. Here is a link to the introduction o
On 29 November 2012 09:45, Andrea Lazzarotto
wrote:
> BTW the fact they also started to copy Sage features (such as R integration)
> is a clear signal.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Andrea Lazzarotto - http://andrealazzarotto.com
You might just as well say the fact that
* Sage has copied Mathemati
It's clear there might be legal issues if Mathematica linked to Sage
using Mathlink, so I was thinking of sending the email below to both
the FSF and Wolfram Research. Any comments?
=
Hi,
I would like to seek some clarification on software license
conditions. Since this affects Wolfra
Dear all,
While updating MPIR in #13137, we remarked the old fix for compilation on
OSX 10.4 (and maybe 10.5) running in 32 bit mode on 64 bit Intel hardware
was not maintained properly and does not do what it was supposed to do
anymore.
This is not so bad because it seems to indicate that the
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:35:08 PM UTC+1, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, I've never been that impressed with pexpect.
>
Just for the record, over here in the "Python world", we already have rpy2.
Here is a link to the introduction of the latest stable version:
http://rpy.sou
Hi,
I implemented the desired changes and updated the ticket (and actually
got a "green" for the very first time!). The patch is again for
review, and I would appreciate if some of the people contributed to
the discussion would check if the requested changes are implemented
the way they wanted it
46 matches
Mail list logo
