[sage-devel] Re: Create a "distribute" method (useful for SR, possibly for other cases).

A first implementation , distributing symbolic sums and integrals over sums, needs review. -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mercredi 3 mai 2017 17:01:46 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Idea : a mechanism allowing to obtain the right-hand expressin of

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

Hi, On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 09:23:30PM +0200, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > Hello Marcelo, > > Please have a look at > > https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19519 If we could have a similar feature for memory usage, that could be interesting, see e.g. https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22684 Ciao, T

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Should RLF/CLF be exact ?

On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 07:42:43PM +, Simon King wrote: > Hi! > > On 2017-05-08, Thierry wrote: > > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0700, Volker Braun wrote: > > The behaviour of this example comes from the fact that at this point 0.1 > > is still a RealLiteral (hence kind of exact until

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

thanks David and Vincent for your interesting insights :) i'll start to have a look.. 1 motivation for this feature: when you have two or more implementations of the same problem and want to compare them based on running times. El lunes, 8 de mayo de 2017, 21:24:10 (UTC+2), vdelecroix escribió

[sage-devel] Re: Should RLF/CLF be exact ?

Hi! On 2017-05-08, Thierry wrote: > On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0700, Volker Braun wrote: > The behaviour of this example comes from the fact that at this point 0.1 > is still a RealLiteral (hence kind of exact until it gets a precision), Is it? I thought 0.1 is not exact, whereas 1/10 i

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

Hello Marcelo, Please have a look at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19519 Vincent On 08/05/2017 10:35, mforets wrote: Hi, i wanted to know if there is a keyword that can be put next to a doctest to measure performance with respect to computation time, like: sage: possibly_long_calculatio

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Should RLF/CLF be exact ?

On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0700, Volker Braun wrote: > The lazy fields are not just wrappers around self._value: > > sage: a = RLF(0.1) > sage: RealIntervalField(150)(a) > 0.10? > sage: RealIntervalField(150)(a._value) > 0.155511

[sage-devel] Re: Should RLF/CLF be exact ?

The lazy fields are not just wrappers around self._value: sage: a = RLF(0.1) sage: RealIntervalField(150)(a) 0.10? sage: RealIntervalField(150)(a._value) 0.1555111512312578270211815834046? On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 8:50:48 PM UTC+2, Th

[sage-devel] Should RLF/CLF be exact ?

Hi, RealLazyField() and ComplexLazyField() claim to be exact, but currently they are not: sage: RLF.is_exact() True sage: a = RLF(0.1) ; a 0.10001? sage: a._value 0.100 sage: a._value.parent() Real Field with 53 bits of precision Also, the doc explicitely states: Thi

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 5:24 AM, mforets wrote: > ok! i've tested exporting SAGE_TIMEOUT and it does have an effect, for > example: > > ** > Tests run before process (pid=3019) timed out: > sage: integrate(exp(-x)*sinh(sqrt(x)), x

Re: [sage-devel] broken: http://old.files.sagemath.org/src-old/

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Pedro Cruz wrote: > Hello, > > I'm looking for version 5.2 and the above link is broken in master > www.sagemath.org pages. > > Some emails, in this forum, are also pointing to that link. > > Where can I find SageMtath 5.2 to try to compile it on Ubuntu 16.04? That

[sage-devel] broken: http://old.files.sagemath.org/src-old/

Hello, I'm looking for version 5.2 and the above link is broken in master www.sagemath.org pages. Some emails, in this forum, are also pointing to that link. Where can I find SageMtath 5.2 to try to compile it on Ubuntu 16.04? Thank you. Pedro -- You received this message because you are s

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Trac down

On 2017-05-08 12:23, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > Works for me. A particular link you have problem there? I had the same troubles a couple of hours ago; now it seem to work again. Daniel -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Trac down

On Mon, 8 May 2017, Dima Pasechnik wrote: Works for me. A particular link you have problem there? Seems to work again. At least these had problems: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22773 https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22674 -- Jori Mäntysalo

[sage-devel] Re: Trac down

Works for me. A particular link you have problem there? On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 9:25:16 AM UTC+1, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > > Trac gives the Internal server error, and even that after waiting a > minute. > > -- > Jori Mäntysalo > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

ok! i've tested exporting SAGE_TIMEOUT and it does have an effect, for example: ** Tests run before process (pid=3019) timed out: sage: integrate(exp(-x)*sinh(sqrt(x)), x, 0, oo, algorithm='maxima').simplify() ## line 10 ## **

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 4:35 AM, mforets wrote: > Hi, > i wanted to know if there is a keyword that can be put next to a doctest > to measure performance with respect to computation time, like: > > sage: possibly_long_calculation(..) # timeout 600s > 0 > > this is seems item 1) in this thread's O

[sage-devel] Re: Timeout for doctests.

Hi, i wanted to know if there is a keyword that can be put next to a doctest to measure performance with respect to computation time, like: sage: possibly_long_calculation(..) # timeout 600s 0 this is seems item 1) in this thread's OP, hence i'm attaching this question here (but please remove

[sage-devel] Trac down

Trac gives the Internal server error, and even that after waiting a minute. -- Jori Mäntysalo