A fixed version (you can run sagemath-upstream-binary without the -full) is
now busy copying from the dev PPA to the stable PPA.
7.0~aimsppa1~qa201602060140061
Regards,
Jan
On 3 February 2016 at 17:46, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> Hi
>
> TL;DR install sagemath-upstream-binary-full for a fix. The er
I'm working on an issue with initialization of affine and projective
morphisms over subschemes (Trac #20018).
In looking at this I've uncovered a sticky issue that I'm not sure what the
right fix is. Essentially, over a subscheme the coordinate ring is a
quotient ring. Thus, when initializing t
The SageMath homepage seems to say that v7.0 is available:
http://www.sagemath.org/
But when I try to download the binary for Mac OS X, no download is listed
for 7.0, just 6.10.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe fro
After `brew cask install sage`, the resulting sage install complains that
it didn't compile properly.
$ brew cask install sage
...
$ sage
RuntimeError: maximum recursion depth exceeded during compilation
┌┐
│ SageMath Version 6.
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 3:29:29 PM UTC-6, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2016-02-05 19:59, William Stein wrote:
> > Maybe is_prime for field elements should just raise an exception?
>
> This reminds me very much about the recent discussion we had about floor
> division... and which didn't
Hi,
i re-established the connection between trac and the wiki so that it is
now possible to log in to the wiki with your trac login/password.
Ciao,
Thierry
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop r
On Friday, 5 February 2016 19:34:47 UTC, Martin Vahi wrote:
>
>
>
> neljapäev, 4. veebruar 2016 20:30.12 UTC kirjutas Dima Pasechnik:
> ...
>
>> In a working build one will see
>> "checking whether we can use the existing Boehm-Weiser library ... yes"
>> rather than 'no'
>> ...
>>
>
> Thank You
On 2016-02-05 19:59, William Stein wrote:
Maybe is_prime for field elements should just raise an exception?
This reminds me very much about the recent discussion we had about floor
division... and which didn't really come to a conclusion.
It's really the same problem: you have something whic
On 2016-02-05 20:45, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
About the code, the current version is
{{{
def is_prime(n):
try:
return n.is_prime()
except (AttributeError, NotImplementedError):
return ZZ(n).is_prime()
}}}
I think that we should change it to
{{{
from sage.structure.c
Dear Nils,
Ddo not doubt that you and I (and everybody else) agrees that the
current behaviour of subs (*) is the desired behaviour.
This discussion is about the obvious cases where **kwargs is wrongly
used, e.g. in Matrix. I saw it happen in many places already. I even
saw this one:
def a_f
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 12:46:54 PM UTC-8, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> > Well, the call syntax for polynomials and symbolic expressions really
> > benefits from arbitrary keywords.
>
> Yeah, I guess there is nothing wrong with
> "an_expression.subs(whatever=4)" returning nothing even though
> Well, the call syntax for polynomials and symbolic expressions really
> benefits from arbitrary keywords.
Yeah, I guess there is nothing wrong with
"an_expression.subs(whatever=4)" returning nothing even though
'whatever' is not a variable appearing in an_expression.
Nathann
--
You received t
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 10:23:17 AM UTC-8, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> > I suppose you meant to add a third rule
> > 3) In any branch where a **kwargs -taking function does not call
> another
> > function it forwards the **kwargs argument to, it must raise an error if
> any
> > unrecog
> In general, though, I think it's worth emphasizing **kwargs incurs a dict
> copy anyway. That means that the difference in cost of calling signatures
> def f(a=optional,**kwargs) versus def f(**kwargs) is not as big as you might
> initially guess. I suspect that the verbosity of the former might
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 10:20:22 AM UTC-8, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Passing the keywords down individually also incurs some overhead, plus we
> are talking about fairly small dicts. Its unlikely to be of a performance
> concern IMHO
>
> As Travis noted, Python *always* makes a shallow copy
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 11:34:47AM -0800, Martin Vahi wrote:
[...]
> Since I'm not a Sage developer, that concludes this bug report for me. I
> wonder, if it should be re-written to some bug-track or something
> similar? I've read that there's quite a specific procedure for filing
> those repo
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:50 AM, David Wong wrote:
> prime_number = bignumber / 2
> is_prime(prime_number) # -> False
>
> prime_number = bignumber // 2
> is_prime(prime_number) # -> True
>
> prime_number = ZZ(bignumber / 2)
> is_prime(prime_number) # -> True
>
>
> I've spent a couple of days arguin
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Nathann Cohen wrote:
I object. It is a *very* simple mistake that has a *very* simple solution:
Any function that takes **kwargs as argument must:
1) Remove from kwargs all values it understands
2) Forward the remaining content of kwargs to a subfunction
Th
About the code, the current version is
{{{
def is_prime(n):
try:
return n.is_prime()
except (AttributeError, NotImplementedError):
return ZZ(n).is_prime()
}}}
I think that we should change it to
{{{
from sage.structure.coerce import py_scalar_to_element
def is_prime(n):
2016-02-05 10:13:28 Z, Jori Mäntysalo:
>
> On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> > 1. The e-mail goes only to the author(s) of the ticket, not to all
> people
> > cc'ed in that ticket.
>
> To all cc'ed people would not be too much, assuming we could have real
> un-cc -possibility. Bu
neljapäev, 4. veebruar 2016 20:30.12 UTC kirjutas Dima Pasechnik:
...
> In a working build one will see
> "checking whether we can use the existing Boehm-Weiser library ... yes"
> rather than 'no'
> ...
>
Thank You for the answer. My interpretation of it is that the flaw within
the Sage is t
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Bruno Grenet wrote:
> Note that there is a difference between the example in the original email
> and the answers: The original email was about is_prime(something) not
> something.is_prime(). I do not know the mechanisms behind
> is_prime(something) but would it be
Note that there is a difference between the example in the original email and
the answers: The original email was about is_prime(something) not
something.is_prime(). I do not know the mechanisms behind is_prime(something)
but would it be possible that in this case the behavior is slightly differ
On Friday, February 5, 2016, David Roe wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
> 20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Indeed, the definition given in the documentation of "is_prime" does not
>> coincide with what the method is doing.
>>
>> The mathematic
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Indeed, the definition given in the documentation of "is_prime" does not
> coincide with what the method is doing.
>
> The mathematical definition of prime *depends* on the ring. An element of
> a ri
> I suppose you meant to add a third rule
> 3) In any branch where a **kwargs -taking function does not call another
> function it forwards the **kwargs argument to, it must raise an error if any
> unrecognized kwargs are left.
I thought about it for a moment, and wondered if there was any
sit
Hello,
Indeed, the definition given in the documentation of "is_prime" does not
coincide with what the method is doing.
The mathematical definition of prime *depends* on the ring. An element
of a ring is prime if the ideal it generates is prime. And the ideal (3)
is prime in ZZ but not in QQ
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 6:47:19 PM UTC+1, Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> Note that this solution comes as a fairly significant penalty: you end up
> copying/modifying the kwargs argument *all the time*.
>
Passing the keywords down individually also incurs some overhead, plus we
are talking about f
prime_number = bignumber / 2
is_prime(prime_number) # -> False
prime_number = bignumber // 2
is_prime(prime_number) # -> True
prime_number = ZZ(bignumber / 2)
is_prime(prime_number) # -> True
I've spent a couple of days arguing with people about a number (not) being
a prime. Turns out it fails
>
> I suppose you meant to add a third rule
>
3) In any branch where a **kwargs -taking function does not call
> another function it forwards the **kwargs argument to, it must raise an
> error if any unrecognized kwargs are left.
>
> Note that this solution comes as a fairly significant pena
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 9:08:45 AM UTC-8, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> > Yes, this is a more universal problem in the UI:
>
> I object. It is a *very* simple mistake that has a *very* simple solution:
>
> Any function that takes **kwargs as argument must:
> 1) Remove from kwargs a
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 6:08:45 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> Any function that takes **kwargs as argument must:
> 1) Remove from kwargs all values it understands
> 2) Forward the remaining content of kwargs to a subfunction
>
And:
3) Doctest that an unknown arg
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 4:05:22 AM UTC-8, John Cremona wrote:
>
> Understood. I thought that a total order was implemented for number
> field elements, but looking in the code I could not even find the
> relevant _cmp_ function!
>
It's there, but indeed it doesn't implement a total orde
On 2016-02-05 15:43, Nathann Cohen wrote:
sage: Matrix(whatever=58)
[]
I just created http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20015 for this
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving ema
On 2016-02-05 18:08, Nathann Cohen wrote:
Yes, this is a more universal problem in the UI:
I object. It is a *very* simple mistake that has a *very* simple solution:
Any function that takes **kwargs as argument must:
1) Remove from kwargs all values it understands
Or just not u
In particular, we cannot consider each function with such a bug to be
'just an instance of a more general problem'. They have to be fixed
one by one, especially when the function involved is perhaps the most
common constructor function new users will call.
There was some talk here of making Sage m
> Yes, this is a more universal problem in the UI:
I object. It is a *very* simple mistake that has a *very* simple solution:
Any function that takes **kwargs as argument must:
1) Remove from kwargs all values it understands
2) Forward the remaining content of kwargs to a subf
On Friday, February 5, 2016 at 6:43:38 AM UTC-8, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> Let me add to that:
>
> sage: Matrix(whatever=58)
> []
>
Yes, this is a more universal problem in the UI: it's quite common that
unknown keywords just get pass through, usually because they might be of
use for a
Hello everybody,
I am writing here to share an inconsistency with the behaviour of Matrix.plot:
When M is sparse:
M.plot() shows which entries of M are nonzero.
When M is dense:
M.plot() shows M with colors representing the value of each cell.
Let me add to that:
sage: Matrix(whate
On 5 February 2016 at 12:04, John Cremona wrote:
> Understood. I thought that a total order was implemented for number
> field elements, but looking in the code I could not even find the
> relevant _cmp_ function!
I think it is possible that the clever code people have written to
implement order
Understood. I thought that a total order was implemented for number
field elements, but looking in the code I could not even find the
relevant _cmp_ function!
John
On 5 February 2016 at 11:49, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> If the default comparison on your objects is not a total order there
> is no gu
If the default comparison on your objects is not a total order there
is no guarantee that the output of a sorting algorithm (name any that
you know) will give you a unique output.
sage: sorted([{1,2},{3,4}])
[{1, 2}, {3, 4}]
sage: sorted([{3,4},{1,2}])
[{3, 4}, {1, 2}]
Which comes
I have two lists of 6 (relative) number field elements: they are the
same up to a permutation, as revealed by turning each into a set, but
the do not sort to the same list!
sage: type(L1)
sage: type(L2)
sage: type(L1[0])
sage: type(L2[0])
sage: len(L1)==len(L2)==6
True
sage: L1==L2
False
sag
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
1. The e-mail goes only to the author(s) of the ticket, not to all people
cc'ed in that ticket.
To all cc'ed people would not be too much, assuming we could have real
un-cc -possibility. But now you can not throw a comment and later get out
of ticket
> What did I request that you cannot do regarding "spkg-src"? I am still in
> favour of improving spkg-src.
Oh, Right. It seems that I actually accepted all your requests on this
ticket. Crazy. Either way Volker will never let it pass, so let's give
this up.
Don't you want to do something with th
On 2016-02-05 10:49, Nathann Cohen wrote:
I'll just add this thing on the heap on which I store
the ideas you oppose by requesting things I cannot do, with the
"Testing CPLEX/Maple/Matlab" and "spkg-src" tickets.
What did I request that you cannot do regarding "spkg-src"? I am still
in favour
> Fine for me, provided that
>
> 1. The e-mail goes only to the author(s) of the ticket, not to all people
> cc'ed in that ticket.
> 2. The e-mail gets sent a finite number of times per ticket (say, once after
> 1 month and once after 6 months).
I don't know how to guess a ticket's author, especia
On 2016-02-05 10:26, Nathann Cohen wrote:
There many useful trac reports which can be used instead of this, for
example http://trac.sagemath.org/report/57 is what you want I guess.
This only works if everybody checks that page regularly, which is not
the case. Hell, even getting a message if a
On 2016-02-04 23:25, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, 4 February 2016 21:00:03 UTC, jhonrubia6 wrote:
>
> How do I know the version of a given ticket which needs review?
>
>
> typically for reviewing you don't even want to know, just merge over the
> current
> develop branch.
> (o
> There many useful trac reports which can be used instead of this, for
> example http://trac.sagemath.org/report/57 is what you want I guess.
This only works if everybody checks that page regularly, which is not
the case. Hell, even getting a message if a ticket in needs_work has
not been touched
On 2016-02-04 22:00, jhonrubia6 wrote:
How do I know the version of a given ticket which needs review?
Checkout the branch and run "cat VERSION.txt"
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivi
On 2016-02-05 10:10, Nathann Cohen wrote:
I was just wondering if this situation was worth getting some script
running (I can give it a try): every week or so it would run, and if a
ticket has been in needs_work for more than a month with no comment on
it, the script would add a message on the tr
Hello everybody !
Because of another thread here, I noticed this ticket:
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16871
It was in `positive_review` 14 months ago, was set back to
`needs_work` because of a (minor?) problem in the doc, and apparently
forgotten since.
I was just wondering if this situa
log2 and pi seem to be of the same race:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-devel/Oi3bLbO5eO0
Nathann
On 5 February 2016 at 08:04, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
> Can somebody explain what is the meaning of "log2" in the global namespace?
> log2? says "- - we need to make sure this at lea
You need a unique string to search&replace, and after moving from
/verylonguniquepath to / you've lost that uniqueness. So to undo you'd have
to store the state how it was before patching in some external file.
Possible but extra code paths that need to be written and tested...
On Friday, Febru
On 2016-02-05 09:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
By the way, I do not see why the present binary patchning procedure cannot get
an undo mode.
It's not technically impossible, just more work to implement I guess.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-deve
By the way, I do not see why the present binary patchning procedure cannot get
an undo mode. Then it can be used many times, to move things around.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
Can somebody explain what is the meaning of "log2" in the global
namespace? log2? says "- - we need to make sure this at least does not
leave log2._gobj uninitialized - -".
* * *
log? says "See log? for more information about its behavior." Duh.
log_gamma? has broken docstring formatting. Al
58 matches
Mail list logo
