On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:48 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> According to Victor Miller [1], Sage one the Jenks Prize [2] last
Great news! Thanks William for putting all this together in the first place!
> night. Congrats to us Sage developers!
>
> [1] https://plus.google.com/11250350327550
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 09:48:55 -0700
> William Stein wrote:
>
>> According to Victor Miller [1], Sage one the Jenks Prize [2] last
>> night. Congrats to us Sage developers!
>>
>> [1] https://plus.google.com/112503503275509870006/posts
>> [2]
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 09:48:55 -0700
William Stein wrote:
> According to Victor Miller [1], Sage one the Jenks Prize [2] last
> night. Congrats to us Sage developers!
>
> [1] https://plus.google.com/112503503275509870006/posts
> [2] http://www.sigsam.org/awards/jenks/awardees/
Congratulations!
Hi,
According to Victor Miller [1], Sage one the Jenks Prize [2] last
night. Congrats to us Sage developers!
[1] https://plus.google.com/112503503275509870006/posts
[2] http://www.sigsam.org/awards/jenks/awardees/
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein
Hey Matthieu,
The problem is you are returning the *original* *modified* object you
passed in, not a new object like you seem to be expecting. Just make a copy
of l before making any changes to it. Since the function is straight
forward, I'd recommend just making it iterative using a while lo
I might have misunderstood your suggestion, but I don't think that it is
the solution (I tried it and I get the same problem).
My problem is that when I try the same expansion several times in a row,
the list is not cleared after each call and thus the coefficients are false:
sage: M=FreeMonoid(2
Dox wrote:
I could try to change something... However, What is the way to provide a
patch? Is it through github?
http://sagemath.org/doc/developer/walk_through.html#submitting-a-change
-leif
--
() The ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/\ Help Cure HTML E-Mail
--
You received this message because you
Nathann Cohen wrote:
Three years later I got bitten by this again, and I now believe that the
degree of a vertex incident with a loop should be 1.
\o/
Because it is
rather pleasant to be sure that the degree of a vertex is equal to the
number of its neighbors O_o
Although that in turn make
I'm guessing this is just due to you using dict() in the function
definition. See http://effbot.org/zone/default-values.htm . If you
replace it with None do something like
if l is None:
l = {}
at the beginning of the function, then things should be okay.
--Mike
--Mike
On Sat, Jun 29, 201
In a recursive function, I use a dictionary (which contains the elements of
the expansion of the argument on another basis). Since each call to the
function needs the dictionary, I don't want the user to be forced to put
the dictionary as an argument (i.e. I want him to call to_pbw(elem) instead
10 matches
Mail list logo
