Re: [sage-devel] Performances of cartesian products

> Are these rings generally used? Sage has special support for binary > matrices, should it also have something similar for "binary power rings"? The rings I use are products of IntegerModRing and finite fields. I gave this example for the bug report, as the actual construction is long and useless

Re: [sage-devel] Performances of cartesian products

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015, Nathann Cohen wrote: Just look. This is the time it takes to build the addition table of (Z/2Z)^8 (contains 256 elements) when you define it through products: Are these rings generally used? Sage has special support for binary matrices, should it also have something simil

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Francesco Biscani wrote: >> Exactly. And also the mission statement: viable alternative to the Ma's - >> that is tricky! > > > I have always felt a tad confused and mislead by this statement. > > As someone who has interacted over the years with physicists and en

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

> > Exactly. And also the mission statement: viable alternative to the Ma's - > that is tricky! > I have always felt a tad confused and mislead by this statement. As someone who has interacted over the years with physicists and engineers using daily Mathematica, Maple and Matlab, I see very litt

Re: [sage-devel] Using sage as a CGI

On Monday, 28 September 2015 17:46:04 UTC+5:30, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > > What system you use for CGI? Linux? Ubuntu, Centos, Fedora...? Normal > Apache, something else? > I was using apache on Ubuntu with cgi script written in python. Now I am using Django for same and everything worked but s

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On Monday, September 28, 2015, kcrisman wrote: > >>> The much-maligned controversial statement (Sage doomed) worth reviewing? >>> >> >> Though I think the growth/survival of the SageMath project is in serious >> jeopardy due to lack of funding, I for one am definitely not giving up. >> The activi

Re: [sage-devel] Performances of cartesian products

Hello, Indeed!! See #19299. Vincent On 28/09/15 09:57, Nathann Cohen wrote: Hello guys, I write this post to alert those who know the code and could do something about it. As you know I study graph theory, and I have to go out of my comfort zone rather regularly. These days, it led me to def

[sage-devel] Re: comm. algebra question

I don't see why that shouldn't work. There is a natural coercion from x in ZZ['x'] to x in QQ['x'], so they are treated as the same. (Also we are likely to get many complaints if this raised an error because it would be very surprising (and subtle) behavior.) Best, Travis On Monday, September

[sage-devel] Performances of cartesian products

Hello guys, I write this post to alert those who know the code and could do something about it. As you know I study graph theory, and I have to go out of my comfort zone rather regularly. These days, it led me to define products of rings and run some computations of them (mostly additions). The p

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

> > >> The much-maligned controversial statement (Sage doomed) worth reviewing? >> > > Though I think the growth/survival of the SageMath project is in serious > jeopardy due to lack of funding, I for one am definitely not giving up. > The activity is not doomed. > As usual, I think it's impo

[sage-devel] Re: Docbuild memory usage

PS: Plot of RSS for single-thread doc build. Its higher than the minimal per-process "ulimit -v" since it adds up the RSS of all processes in the process group. PPS: We are getting close to t

Re: [sage-devel] Using sage as a CGI

On Fri, 25 Sep 2015, Amarjeet Kapoor wrote: I am trying to execute sage script through cgi script but unable to do that and I found that I am facing same problem related to environment variable HOME not set when saw error.log but I am unable to get how you solved this. What system you use for

[sage-devel] Re: Docbuild memory usage

The relevant number is RSS, not virtual memory (really: addressing space). Virtual memory includes mmaps that don't actually use ram. Docbuild effectively uses about 2GB RSS. On Monday, September 28, 2015 at 1:02:11 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > I did a little experiment to see how much m

Re: [sage-devel] cayley_graph: confusion between Additive and Multiplicative groups

>> > Just in case, note that for multiplication in rings, you can already do: >> > >> > sage: IntegerModRing(10).unit_group().cayley_graph() Hey, my mistake, I thought you were saying that it is how the *additive* group could be obtained. About my other question: what should groups.misc.A

[sage-devel] Docbuild memory usage

I did a little experiment to see how much memory the docbuilder needs. I did this for a single-threaded operation. I measured the smallest value N such that ( ulimit -v N; make doc ) works, after make doc-clean. In Sage 6.8: 270 In Sage 6.9.rc0: 280 So Sage needs almost 3GB of (virtual

Re: [sage-devel] cayley_graph: confusion between Additive and Multiplicative groups

> Perhaps you should consider adding an alias or renaming it. I would > miss it every time. Especially since I was following a paper which calls it "the additive group of ". (just checked). Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group.

Re: [sage-devel] cayley_graph: confusion between Additive and Multiplicative groups

> The multiplication law in a ring is never a group law sice zero is not > invertible, so, for multiplication we have to select the invertible > elements, those form the unig group. Perhaps you should consider adding an alias or renaming it. I would miss it every time. Nathann -- You received t

Re: [sage-devel] cayley_graph: confusion between Additive and Multiplicative groups

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:46:26AM +0200, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > Just in case, note that for multiplication in rings, you can already do: > > > > sage: IntegerModRing(10).unit_group().cayley_graph() > > Whaat? Unit group? Is that standard terminology? What's wrong with > `.additive_g

Re: [sage-devel] cayley_graph: confusion between Additive and Multiplicative groups

> i guess the actual issue is that groups.misc.AdditiveCyclic(10) produces a > ring, not a group, hence the confusion: > > sage: G = groups.misc.AdditiveCyclic(10) > sage: G in Groups() > False I really love the fact that groups.misc.AdditiveCyclic(10) is "not a group" > I

Re: [sage-devel] cayley_graph: confusion between Additive and Multiplicative groups

Hi, i guess the actual issue is that groups.misc.AdditiveCyclic(10) produces a ring, not a group, hence the confusion: sage: G = groups.misc.AdditiveCyclic(10) sage: G is IntegerModRing(10) True sage: G in Groups() False sage: G in Rings() T