On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:16 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:06 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't know why (yet), but the network connection from the room where
>> the sagemath.org website (and all sage.math computers) are hosted to
>> the outside world seems to hav
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 at 02:00PM -0800, Dan Drake wrote:
> sage: preparse('len(t) = 4')
> '__tmp__=var("t"); len = symbolic_expression(Integer(4)).function(t)'
Hmm. If you try the same with one of Python's basic keywords (like
"else"), it fails because Python won't let you assign such a thin
To see what is really happening:
sage: preparse('len(t) = 4')
'__tmp__=var("t"); len = symbolic_expression(Integer(4)).function(t)'
Dan
--
--- Dan Drake
- http://math.pugetsound.edu/~ddrake
---
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sa
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 at 01:36PM -0800, luisfe wrote:
> {{{
> sage: t=(1,2,3)
> sage: type(t)
> tuple
> sage: len(t)
> 3
> sage: len(t)=4
> sage: t
> t
> sage: type(t)
> sage.symbolic.expression.Expression
> }}}
Looks like some of our preparsing to make symbolic stuff work nicer: try this:
f(t) =
Op maandag 4 maart 2013 22:36:33 UTC+1 schreef luisfe het volgende:
>
> Hi,
>
> Can any one enlight me about what is going on here?
>
> {{{
> sage: t=(1,2,3)
> sage: type(t)
> tuple
> sage: len(t)
> 3
> sage: len(t)=4
> sage: t
> t
> sage: type(t)
> sage.symbolic.expression.Expression
> }}}
>
It go
Hi,
Can any one enlight me about what is going on here?
{{{
sage: t=(1,2,3)
sage: type(t)
tuple
sage: len(t)
3
sage: len(t)=4
sage: t
t
sage: type(t)
sage.symbolic.expression.Expression
}}}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsu
If anyone still wants to do Sage remotely, http://sagecell.sagemath.org/
still works :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@goo
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:06 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know why (yet), but the network connection from the room where
> the sagemath.org website (and all sage.math computers) are hosted to
> the outside world seems to have vanished. I'm aware of this, and
> have written to the sy
Hi,
I don't know why (yet), but the network connection from the room where
the sagemath.org website (and all sage.math computers) are hosted to
the outside world seems to have vanished. I'm aware of this, and
have written to the sysadmins in the server room to ask what happened.
-- William
-
On 2013-03-04 21:17, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
> Hey,
>I think it's because trac and sagemath.org is down.
Yep, the whole Sage cluster seems down, I wonder what happened...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from thi
Hey,
I think it's because trac and sagemath.org is down.
Best,
Travis
On Monday, March 4, 2013 3:02:04 PM UTC-5, Charles Bouillaguet wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am running a patchbot on my (mostly idle) machine, and I witnessed this
> :
>
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>File "/sc
Hi all,
I am running a patchbot on my (mostly idle) machine, and I witnessed this :
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/scratch/sage-5.8.beta2/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py", line
687, in
main(args)
File "/scratch/sage-5.8.beta2/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py", line
671, in m
If the GCC spkg has been installed and MPIR (or MPFR, MPC, ZLIB) gets
rebuilt, then GCC doesn't work properly during the "install" phase of
MPIR, because GCC uses the MPIR libraries.
Since a system GCC might also use the Sage libraries, we should ensure
in all cases that nothing gets built in para
Sorry the previous message has been set before completion:
We get
sage: 3+a, 3-a, 3*a
(5, 1, 6)
as expected, but
sage: 3/a
generates the following error:
TypeError Traceback (most recent call last)
in ()
> 1 Integer(3)/a
...
TypeError: descriptor 'category' of
Hi,
In Sage, the reflected division operator, __rdiv__, seems not to behave as
the other reflected operators, __radd__, __rsub__ and __rmul__: it
generates an error in the following example: consider the simple class:
class A(SageObject):
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
def
I took a quick look at 8335 and it doesn't look like there would be any
conflict in the changesets.
On Monday, March 4, 2013 4:29:08 AM UTC-5, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:57:11 PM UTC+1, Ben Hutz wrote:
>>
>> As some of you are aware the (arithmetic) dynamical syst
Am 04.03.2013 12:41, schrieb Simon King:
> The patchbot situation is:
> - The current topmost patchbot report is openSUSE/.../jehova. It seems
> that it is still using the old version of the second patch, as there
> is a mismatch. Here, the startup_time plugin complains with 90%
> confidence
Hi Jeroen,
On 2013-03-04, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2013-03-04 12:01, Simon King wrote:
>> +With 99.3% confidence, startup time decreased by at least 0.1%
>> +With 99.4% confidence, startup time increased by at least 0.1%
>
>> Since the code didn't change in between, how significant is it th
On 2013-03-04 12:01, Simon King wrote:
> +With 99.3% confidence, startup time decreased by at least 0.1%
> +With 99.4% confidence, startup time increased by at least 0.1%
> Since the code didn't change in between, how significant is it then?
Are you really really sure that the code didn't chan
Hi!
At some point, the startup_time plugin showed
-With 25% confidence, startup time increased by at least 0.25%
-With 44% confidence, startup time increased by at least 0.1%
+With 82% confidence, startup time decreased by at least 0.5%
+With 97% confidence, startup time decreased by at le
On Monday, March 4, 2013 10:35:35 AM UTC+1, David Kohel wrote:
>
>
> In a ring of characteristic 0, it seems that 0^0 (= 1) is well-defined.
> In my view this is correct. It makes it much simpler to define the
> matrix (e.g. FF a finite field):
>
> G = matrix([ [ a^i for a in FF ] for i in ra
In a ring of characteristic 0, it seems that 0^0 (= 1) is well-defined.
In my view this is correct. It makes it much simpler to define the
matrix (e.g. FF a finite field):
G = matrix([ [ a^i for a in FF ] for i in range(k) ])
However, in finite fields or any of the the following rings, 0^0
giv
On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:57:11 PM UTC+1, Ben Hutz wrote:
>
> As some of you are aware the (arithmetic) dynamical systems community has
> been working on dynamical system functionality for Sage. As the initial
> ticket has been reviewed (#13130) I've opened tickets for the remaining
> (comple
23 matches
Mail list logo
