On 12/08/15 06:23, Hans Gundlach wrote:
I also assumed all this is done in the sage cloud terminal.
What is "all this"? This should be up to you whether you want to use the
cloud or your own computer. But I have no idea how does work the cloud.
--
You received this message because you are su
I also assumed all this is done in the sage cloud terminal.
On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 9:06:43 PM UTC-7, Hans Gundlach wrote:
>
> I followed those instructions as accurately as I could from the pages.
>
> On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 8:54:42 PM UTC-7, vdelecroix wrote:
>>
>> On 12/08/15 03:0
I followed those instructions as accurately as I could from the pages.
On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 8:54:42 PM UTC-7, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> On 12/08/15 03:01, Hans Gundlach wrote:
> > I'm having a problem connecting my ssh key to my Trac account. I first
> > tried linking my key manually. I ge
On 12/08/15 03:01, Hans Gundlach wrote:
I'm having a problem connecting my ssh key to my Trac account. I first
tried linking my key manually. I generated a ssh key and copied the key to
my trac account and saved. Note,Is the first part of the ssh-rsa part
needed for the ssh key?
What is "the fi
I'm having a problem connecting my ssh key to my Trac account. I first
tried linking my key manually. I generated a ssh key and copied the key to
my trac account and saved. Note,Is the first part of the ssh-rsa part
needed for the ssh key? when I typed ssh g...@trac.sagemath.org info
the termi
> On Aug 11, 2015, at 07:17, Daniel Krenn wrote:
>
> On 2015-08-11 12:00, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
>> Can you confirm that you get the same regression as I do?
>>
>> Sébastien
>>
>> With sage 6.8:
>>
>> $ sage nbruin.sage
>> Time: CPU 2.48 s, Wall: 2.49 s
>> Time: CPU 2.13 s, Wall: 2.16 s
>> Ti
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Stefan Witzel wrote:
> I see (at least partly). The reason I became aware is that
> PolynomialQuotientRing_generic doesn't implement cover(). Is that on
> purpose?
I doubt that that is on purpose. Multiple inheritance would solve it,
though there may be other iss
Thanks!
On 11/08/15 22:13, Harald Schilly wrote:
It's in the file archive:
http://old.files.sagemath.org/spkg/archive/ppl-1.1pre9.p0.spkg
-- harald
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I was trying to build old version of Sage (it is
It's in the file archive:
http://old.files.sagemath.org/spkg/archive/ppl-1.1pre9.p0.spkg
-- harald
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was trying to build old version of Sage (it is holidays). But I was not
> able to found the pa
Hello,
I was trying to build old version of Sage (it is holidays). But I was
not able to found the package
ppl-1.1pre9.p0
which prevents me to build sage-6.0 (as well as 6.1 and 6.2). Does
anybody knows where it might be? Could somebody update it on the mirrors?
Note that sage-6.3 went sm
> Cannot confirm this:
>
Okay, thanks for checking! So the hypothesis now is that it is due to an
improvement from #14058 which was applied on my sage-6.8. Thanksfully!
Sébastien
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe
I see (at least partly). The reason I became aware is that
PolynomialQuotientRing_generic doesn't implement cover(). Is that on
purpose?
(I haven't been using Sage for very long yet, but it seems to happen
quite often that code generally works but is suddenly broken by the fact
that an object
We used to try to describe mathematical properties through Python
inheritance, but have since shifted to using Sage's category
framework. So I don't think that there's a particularly strong reason
to choose either CommutativeRing or QuotientRing_generic to inherit
from. Of course, as a Python cl
On 2015-08-11 12:00, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
Can you confirm that you get the same regression as I do?
Sébastien
With sage 6.8:
$ sage nbruin.sage
Time: CPU 2.48 s, Wall: 2.49 s
Time: CPU 2.13 s, Wall: 2.16 s
Time: CPU 33.20 s, Wall: 34.11 s
With sage 6.9.beta1:
$ sage nbruin.sage
Time: CPU 7
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:15 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> [Top-posted to stop threadjacking the SymEngine post]
I'm sorry for doing that -- it was sort of relevant to his question,
but starting a new thread is much better.
>
> Just have the sage-python-library install using pip, assuming your syste
>Can you confirm that you get the same regression as I do?
I need somebody to confirm because my version of sage-6.8 was not clean.
--
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,
> Can you profile the code in both versions of Sage, to see where the
regression comes from?
%prun doesn't say much (note that I am compiling sage at the same time
which explains the 15s)...
With sage 6.8 :
sage: %prun test(a,b)
3 function calls in 2.799 seconds
Ordered by: inte
>
> Can you confirm that you get the same regression as I do?
>
Can you profile the code in both versions of Sage, to see where the
regression comes from?
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
I noticed that PolynomialQuotientRing_generic is not derived from
QuotientRing_generic but rather directly from CommutativeRing. Is there a
reason for that?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
In the discussion [1] it was noticed out that sage cannot reduce elements
in polynomial rings over arbitrary rings modulo non-principal ideals and
(more importantly) how to react to this. There was a general tendency for
raising an exception rather than returning bogus results. But in the
curre
Hello,
I think that we should seriously start a regression test suite as this
is not the first time!
Does anybody already started something? Has suggestion?
Regression tests might even be included in the patchbot.
Vincent
On 11/08/15 12:00, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
Can you confirm that you g
Can you confirm that you get the same regression as I do?
Sébastien
With sage 6.8:
$ sage nbruin.sage
Time: CPU 2.48 s, Wall: 2.49 s
Time: CPU 2.13 s, Wall: 2.16 s
Time: CPU 33.20 s, Wall: 34.11 s
With sage 6.9.beta1:
$ sage nbruin.sage
Time: CPU 7.83 s, Wall: 8.07 s
Time: CPU 8.07 s, Wall: 8
It is technically feasible and certainly easy. But will the current
programmers will one day contribute to Sage? If the answer is no, it
would be bad to include it in Sage source code as it will diverge from
upstream. This is why I asked to ask before moving on.
On 11/08/15 02:44, Travis Scrim
[Top-posted to stop threadjacking the SymEngine post]
Just have the sage-python-library install using pip, assuming your system
has all the dependencies, is almost trivial. The real question is always
how to handle the dependencies, starting at a Fortran compiler. Also, just
to establish a base
24 matches
Mail list logo
