Re: [sage-devel] Re: [ARM] Sage 6.4

Hi, Le 17/11/2014 12:17, Volker Braun a écrit : Our gcc 4.9.2 doesn't compile on arm, and nobody reviewed http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17348 so far. Somebody did before I found the time to read about it... Snark on #sagemath -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the G

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Bill Page wrote: > On 19 November 2014 21:23, kcrisman wrote: >> >> >>> Since this mostly concerns FriCAS I am cross posting to that group. I will >>> also post the patch there. For FriCAS list reference the original email >>> thread is here: >>> >> >> But if

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

Hello ! >> Am I misreading this or does this belong on sage-sexist-comments ? > > I wondered the same, but I would definitely given Nathann the benefit > of the doubt, because: Thank you for the benefit of the doubt. I can use some of that ! The truth is that I have no idea how to say gender-neu

[sage-devel] Re: Sage installation guide and git

> This morning I wanted to install sage on another machine so I went to the > sage > installation guide > to remind myself where to clone the git repository from. As far as I can > see, there's no mention of git anywhere in this guide. In

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On 19 November 2014 21:23, kcrisman wrote: > > >> Since this mostly concerns FriCAS I am cross posting to that group. I will >> also post the patch there. For FriCAS list reference the original email >> thread is here: >> > > But if you come up with a solution Sage (or Ginac, or whatever) can

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

> In my mind, "moving a conversation to sage-flame" is a constructive, > if imperfect way to handle conversations that are going off the deep > end. It's a way that we can flag a conversation as being > inappropriate for the tone of sage-devel without pointing fingers. If > somebody doesn't

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

> Since this mostly concerns FriCAS I am cross posting to that group. I > will also post the patch there. For FriCAS list reference the original > email thread is here: > > But if you come up with a solution Sage (or Ginac, or whatever) can implement too, please let us know! -- You receive

[sage-devel] Sage installation guide and git

This morning I wanted to install sage on another machine so I went to the sage installation guide to remind myself where to clone the git repository from. As far as I can see, there's no mention of git anywhere in this guide. In particular, t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

In my mind, "moving a conversation to sage-flame" is a constructive, if imperfect way to handle conversations that are going off the deep end. It's a way that we can flag a conversation as being inappropriate for the tone of sage-devel without pointing fingers. If somebody doesn't want to continu

Re: [sage-devel] Building Sage 6.4 in openSUSE 13.2 fails

This test if your c++ complier is recent enough and complete enough. You may have to install some extra development packages for your compiler. I would actually be curious to see your "config.log". Francois On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:07:18 Nicolás Sirolli wrote: > Hi, > > After obtaining the source

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

Hi everyone, I have been following this for a while even if I didn't post. I am actually in favor of a code of conduct even so I understand its limitations. Anyway, what I think we really need is "something to do" when you feel insulted or offended in a thread. Something to take into account is t

[sage-devel] Building Sage 6.4 in openSUSE 13.2 fails

Hi, After obtaining the source code from the git repository, I tried to build Sage but it failed. This is the error I see: checking complex.h usability... no checking complex.h presence... yes configure: WARNING: complex.h: present but cannot be compiled configure: WARNING: complex.h: check

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

>> with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P In that case, may I request a moment of silence to be held in honor of the irony of this comment? -Mike -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this gr

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

2014-11-19 20:56 GMT+01:00 Mike Zabrocki : > A bunch of 10~20 guys who can talk together for days about having or > >> not a "code of conduct", each expressing his own voice and mixing it >> with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P >> >> Am I misreading this or does this belong

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Mike Zabrocki wrote: > A bunch of 10~20 guys who can talk together for days about having or >> >> not a "code of conduct", each expressing his own voice and mixing it >> with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P >> > Am I misreading this or does

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

A bunch of 10~20 guys who can talk together for days about having or > not a "code of conduct", each expressing his own voice and mixing it > with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P > > Am I misreading this or does this belong on sage-sexist-comments ? -Mike -- You rece

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

Since this mostly concerns FriCAS I am cross posting to that group. I will also post the patch there. For FriCAS list reference the original email thread is here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-devel/6j-LcC6tpkE Here is the result of compiling the patch against the current SourceF

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

Just a random thought after coming back from a very nice evening out: A bunch of 10~20 guys who can talk together for days about having or not a "code of conduct", each expressing his own voice and mixing it with the others'... really have no communication problem :-P Good night to all ! One revi

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Bill Page wrote: >> OK, this looks better! >> >> (1) -> D(abs(x),x) >> >> _ >> x + x >>(1) --- >> 2abs(x) >> Type: >> Exp

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

I had always assumed that sage-flame was a fictional entity! Please don't post a link here, I do not want to be tempted to read it John On 19 November 2014 16:30, mmarco wrote: > I really like the idea of moving threads to sage-flame when they start to go > out of hand. What was the criteri

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Bill Page wrote: > OK, this looks better! > > (1) -> D(abs(x),x) > > _ > x + x >(1) --- > 2abs(x) > Type: > Expression(Integer) > (2) -> D(conjugate(x),y) > >(2) 0 >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

On Nov 19, 2014 8:30 AM, "mmarco" wrote: > > I really like the idea of moving threads to sage-flame when they start to go out of hand. What was the criterion to do so until now? > > Also, from an ownership point of view, the right to move discussions between google groups belongs to google, and go

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Bill Page wrote: > > On 2014-11-19 9:36 AM, "Bill Page" wrote: >> ... >> Then I noticed that if we have f=z we get >> >> conjugate(z).diff(z) >> >> which is 0. So the 2nd term is 0 and the result is just the first >> Wirtinger derivative. >> >> Perhaps I am mis

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 5:30 PM, mmarco wrote: > Also, from an ownership point of view, the right to move discussions between > google groups belongs to google, and google's rules state that they would do > so when the person that opened the group decides (correct me if i am wrong). > That would m

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

OK, this looks better! (1) -> D(abs(x),x) _ x + x (1) --- 2abs(x) Type: Expression(Integer) (2) -> D(conjugate(x),y) (2) 0 Type: Expression(Integer) (3) -

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

I really like the idea of moving threads to sage-flame when they start to go out of hand. What was the criterion to do so until now? Also, from an ownership point of view, the right to move discussions between google groups belongs to google, and google's rules state that they would do so when

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On 2014-11-19 9:36 AM, "Bill Page" wrote: > ... > Then I noticed that if we have f=z we get > > conjugate(z).diff(z) > > which is 0. So the 2nd term is 0 and the result is just the first Wirtinger derivative. > > Perhaps I am misinterpreting something? > Oops, my fault. According to your defi

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in abs(I*x).diff(x)

On 18 November 2014 21:22, Ondřej Čertík wrote: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Bill Page wrote: >> On 18 November 2014 17:40, Ondřej Čertík wrote: >>> >>> In my notation, the Wirtinger derivative is d f(z) / d z and d f(z) / >>> d conjugate(z). The Df(z) / Dz is the complex derivative taking

Re: [sage-devel] where are the bots ?

Hello, the patchbot seems to be broken again. The round icons says something like "unavailable for maintenance" Frederic Le mercredi 22 octobre 2014 09:05:38 UTC+2, Robert Bradshaw a écrit : > > The patchbot didn't survive the migration to the new machine. Fixed. > > On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 1: