I take it back. Apparently installing them from the Xcode app gives you
the compilers, etc, but not the header files. Using xcode-select --install
seems to yield both.
Bill
On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 4:50:47 PM UTC-7, Bill Janssen wrote:
>
> I've got this problem right now, with Sage 6
I've got this problem right now, with Sage 6.8, on 10.9. And I've run
xcode-select --install from a terminal; it just outputs the line
"xcode-select: note: install requested for command line developer tools"
(which are already installed).
Help!
Bill
On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 at 6:32:23
Already with #18411 it gets better
sage: %time TestSuite(TransitiveGroups()).run()
CPU times: user 27.9 s, sys: 1.83 s, total: 29.8 s
Wall time: 32 s
against
sage: %time TestSuite(TransitiveGroups()).run()
CPU times: user 47.3 s, sys: 3.1 s, total: 50.4 s
Wall time: 52.9 s
There are indeed som
Yes, this is indeed using the system python. I will add a word about that
in the wiki.
Frédéric
Le mardi 15 septembre 2015 20:12:35 UTC+2, Daniel Krenn a écrit :
>
> Ok, seems to need a system wide installation...works now
>
> On 2015-09-15 20:05, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> > I get
> >
> > ./sage
>
>
> > By the patchbot server. There are indeed some problem with the trusted
> > authors and I think that most of it get solved in the last version of
> > the patchbot due to Frederic Chapoton.
>
> Ok, so the list will be updated at one point...
>
As you may have remarked, the trusted list
Hi,
So.. does anybody want to rewrite the SageMath website to be mobile
friendly? Not only did David just complain about this, but some
googlebot sends me a message periodically complaining.
If I were to rewrite the SageMath website myself right now, I would do
it using React.js + react-bootstra
Hello Vincent,
On 2015-09-15 21:14, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
So the list is sorted by the first entry of the rating, the tuple
and not by the score. This is only taken if the same tuple appears.
Why? (And what does this tuple tell me?)
The ranking is determined by the tuple and not only the sc
Hi,
I've created a SageMathCloud project that we can use for organization.
I've added everybody in "the team" to that:
https://cloud.sagemath.com/projects/f125ea34-9817-4715-b879-e26e0c7fcb7c/files/
I've also made a folder "public"
https://cloud.sagemath.com/projects/f125ea34-9817-4715-
Hello Daniel,
So the list is sorted by the first entry of the rating, the tuple
and not by the score. This is only taken if the same tuple appears.
Why? (And what does this tuple tell me?)
The ranking is determined by the tuple and not only the score (e.g. you
do not want to run twice the tes
Can someone help me understand the ticket order of the patchbot. with
patchbot --list (and some user defined boni) I get
[2015-09-15 18:49:38 +] Launching patchbot 2.3.9 with
SAGE_ROOT=/local/dakrenn/sage/patchbot
[2015-09-15 18:49:38 +] Getting trusted author list...
[2015-09-15 18:49
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> If you type 1+1/2 then you do...
>
> I do not do that often in Graph/Design code, if ever. And I would
> probably be okay with Python doing the job anyway.
1+1/2 in Python2 is 1, which I bet you wouldn't be OK with :-)
> Well. Not that i
Hi Everybody,
I think the current Sage UW cluster team is:
- William Stein
- Andrey Novoseltsev
- Dima Pasechnik
- Vincent Delecroix
- Thierry
- Samuel Lelievre
- Harald Schilly
- Andrew Ohana (minimal availability -- but wants to discuss)
I think that's pretty good actu
Ok, seems to need a system wide installation...works now
On 2015-09-15 20:05, Daniel Krenn wrote:
I get
./sage -patchbot
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/local/dakrenn/sage/patchbot/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py",
line 45, in
from trac import scrape, pull_from_trac
File "/
I get
./sage -patchbot
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/local/dakrenn/sage/patchbot/local/bin/patchbot/patchbot.py",
line 45, in
from trac import scrape, pull_from_trac
File "/local/dakrenn/sage/patchbot/local/bin/patchbot/trac.py", line
15, in
from util import (do_or_d
You can specify the number of trials with "max_runs=100" or explicitly
specify the elements to test with "elements=[a, list, of, elements]".
Best,
Travis
On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 6:57:11 AM UTC-5, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> > Doesn't TestSuite().run() have an option to limit the number o
I've also sent an e-mail to Tom Roby, who knows Japanese and uses Sage.
Best,
Travis
On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 3:09:48 AM UTC-5, John Cremona wrote:
>
> On 15 September 2015 at 07:57, Dima Pasechnik > wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Friday, 11 September 2015 09:02:50 UTC-7, kcrisman wrote:
>
On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 5:46:45 AM UTC-4, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 11:03:17 AM UTC+2, Volker Braun wrote:
>>
>> Did you try :set backupcopy=yes in vim?
>>
>
> Thank you! You save my life!
>
I also experience this problem sometimes, and especially wh
> Doesn't TestSuite().run() have an option to limit the number of tests? I
> would use that to reduce the time taken.
I do not think that I can be of any help with TestSuite. Never used it.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
Hellooo,
> That is an interesting idea, as a way to get good illustrative
> examples into the manual without slowing down the testing process.
> But of course it would be better to have a set-up where I could (at
> least temprarily) turn back on the testing of these, since if they are
> not ev
On 2015-09-15 13:28, Nathann Cohen wrote:
I would say that "long time" tests should be less than 30 seconds, unless
there is some exceptional justification.
In some cases, I also skip shorter tests as *many* 10-seconds tests
are not much better than a 2 minutes test :-/
In the case at hand, i.
On 15 September 2015 at 12:42, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> John,
>
> I do not follow you in your message. Surely the doctests have a double
> purpose (documentation+test), but nothing prevents you from writing a
> good documentation on one side with "# not tested" flags (so that the
That is an interes
John,
I do not follow you in your message. Surely the doctests have a double
purpose (documentation+test), but nothing prevents you from writing a
good documentation on one side with "# not tested" flags (so that the
tests are informative to the users) while keeping in a 'TEST' sections
some docte
On 15 September 2015 at 12:28, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> I would say that "long time" tests should be less than 30 seconds, unless
>> there is some exceptional justification.
>
> In some cases, I also skip shorter tests as *many* 10-seconds tests
> are not much better than a 2 minutes test :-/
>
> I
> I would say that "long time" tests should be less than 30 seconds, unless
> there is some exceptional justification.
In some cases, I also skip shorter tests as *many* 10-seconds tests
are not much better than a 2 minutes test :-/
In the case at hand, i.e. the 50 seconds doctest I reported that
I would say that "long time" tests should be less than 30 seconds,
unless there is some exceptional justification.
--
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
# very long time ? :)
On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 12:05:25 PM UTC+2, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> In my current patches I often meet some threshold in the doctests I add.
> Instantaneous doctests are okay, doctests which last a few seconds are "#
> long time", but because
Hello everybody,
In my current patches I often meet some threshold in the doctests I add.
Instantaneous doctests are okay, doctests which last a few seconds are "#
long time", but because I add many 'long' doctests in the same files I
sometimes flag them as 'not tested' lest it take minutes to doc
2015-09-15 10:13:03 UTC+2, Volker Braun:
>
> http://files.sagemath.org/spkg/huge/
>
Maybe that should be mentioned (with a link) at
http://files.sagemath.org/spkg/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this
On 15 September 2015 at 09:13, Volker Braun wrote:
> http://files.sagemath.org/spkg/huge/
OK, so now I need to see if stein-watkins-ecdb.spkg (as at that link)
contains what I think it does.
John
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 1:42:26 AM UTC+2, Andrey Novoseltsev
> wrote:
>>
>> Hel
http://files.sagemath.org/spkg/huge/
On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 1:42:26 AM UTC+2, Andrey Novoseltsev
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> While old packages are being treated/converted: what has happened to
> "huge" ones? One was
>
> polytopes_db_4d-1.0.spkg
>
> which does not seem to be listed anywh
On 15 September 2015 at 07:57, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, 11 September 2015 09:02:50 UTC-7, kcrisman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I have recently finished Japanese translations of the official sage
>>> tutorial and a_tour_of_sage.
>>> I would like to upload them on the trac server as soon as pos
On 15 September 2015 at 00:42, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> Hello,
>
> While old packages are being treated/converted: what has happened to "huge"
> ones? One was
>
> polytopes_db_4d-1.0.spkg
>
> which does not seem to be listed anywhere anymore. I think there was another
> one for elliptic curves.
Hello,
> Why would you need that? If you have
>sage: foo() # optional: bar
>1
>sage: foo() # optional: no bar
>2
> then "sage -t --optional=bar" would expect the output 1, and when you
> run "sage -t" then it would expect the output 2.
I only wanted to say that the interface of
2015-09-14 20:24:01 UTC+2, Thierry:
Some few ideas i planned to work on for a while:
>
> - random testing : the current random doctests uses a single seed, so we
> do
> not get any more information when the doctests are run. We could
> also have some truly random tests that, for example,
> If you type 1+1/2 then you do...
I do not do that often in Graph/Design code, if ever. And I would
probably be okay with Python doing the job anyway.
Well. Not that it is of public interest: I just wanted to show that
"indeed, some parts of Sage could be made somehow independent". Not
that it w
Hi Nathann,
On 2015-09-14, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> No. You have to understand that the optional doctests are
> "declarative". You can run "sage -t --optional=a_package" even if you
> don't have "a_package" installed. Similarly, you are not forced to
> mention all packages that are installed.
>
> F
On 2015-09-14, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Depends what you use Sage for. Personally, I don't use coercion.
If you type 1+1/2 then you do...
--
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
37 matches
Mail list logo
