[sage-devel] Re: GSoC 2017 kickoff

2017-01-20 Thread Ralf Stephan
On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 8:40:06 PM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > > I am not sure I will have time to be a mentor this year, but I would like > to propose porting rubi to sage: > The main tasks would be: 1. implement missing symbolic functions (Meijer-G, Appell, etc.) 2. convert the ruleset to an

[sage-devel] Re: Workaround for missing link to MacTex for MacOS Sage app

2017-01-20 Thread Michael Frey
Yes, it appears to have the path hard coded somewhere. My global path does contain /Library/TeX/texbin which appears to come from /etc/paths.d/TeX. I originally modified the /Applications/SageMath-7.5.1.app/Contents/Resources/start-sage.sh file. I then modified the src/mac-app/start-sage.sh fil

[sage-devel] Re: GSoC 2017 kickoff

2017-01-20 Thread mmarco
I am not sure I will have time to be a mentor this year, but I would like to propose porting rubi to sage: http://www.apmaths.uwo.ca/~arich/ It is a series of rules (over 6000) to be applied to symbolic expressions in order to get their primitive. The results they produce are better than the M

[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for GSoC project: Polynomials - Rewriting and relinking

2017-01-20 Thread Peter Bruin
Hello, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > Our current polynomial implementation has severe issues: > > - Our speed for GF(2^e)[x] is abysmal. > > - For other cases we are probably not linking to the currently fastest > libraries. > > - We don't have multi-point evaluation or fast Lagrange interpo

[sage-devel] Re: Workaround for missing link to MacTex for MacOS Sage app

2017-01-20 Thread Dima Pasechnik
yes, I agree this should be updated, according to https://www.tug.org/mactex/sierra.html I cc to the primary developer of sage.app. On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 4:12:22 AM UTC, Michael Frey wrote: > > I found that when trying to access LATeX (MacTeX) calls in a Sage notebook > via MatPlotLib o

[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for GSoC project: Polynomials - Rewriting and relinking

2017-01-20 Thread Jean-Pierre Flori
On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 11:03:52 AM UTC+1, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > > Hi sage-devel, > > Our current polynomial implementation has severe issues: > > - Our speed for GF(2^e)[x] is abysmal. > > - For other cases we are probably not linking to the currently fastest > libraries.

[sage-devel] Suggestion for GSoC project: Polynomials - Rewriting and relinking

2017-01-20 Thread Johan S . H . Rosenkilde
Hi sage-devel, Our current polynomial implementation has severe issues: - Our speed for GF(2^e)[x] is abysmal. - For other cases we are probably not linking to the currently fastest libraries. - We don't have multi-point evaluation or fast Lagrange interpolation, even though the libraries w