On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, David Coudert wrote:
But anyways, I found more. is_eulerian(path=True) will return either
False OR an Eulerian path. This seems to be clearly wrong.
It is not a correct behavior. This method should have a parameter
`certificate`, default to False. When certificate is True
Thank you all for your answers. This is very helpful.
Eric.
--
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to th
There is src/sage/tests/stl_vector.pyx to demo/test c++ & cython (which is
what I would recommend).
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:31:16 PM UTC+2, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote:
>
> Hi Sage Devs,
>
> We plan to develop some experimental package for Sage, which requires to
> make use of a C++ lib
On 2017-10-18 18:21, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
Dear Sage developers,
You can find a demo of live documentation on:
https://more-sagemath-tutorials.readthedocs.io/
Pick e.g. "Demo basics", click "Activate", and wait a bit. To evaluate
a cell, use shift-Enter as in Jupyter.
Do
On 2017-10-18 19:02, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote:
This option commits us to maintain (unnecessary and dangerous, IMHO)
Sage-specifc SSL patches at least in R, Python and pip
Really? Which Sage-specific SSL patches does this require in Python and pip?
It seems to me that R is the only package ca
> But anyways, I found more. is_eulerian(path=True) will return either False OR
> an Eulerian path. This seems to be clearly wrong.
It is not a correct behavior. This method should have a parameter
`certificate`, default to False. When certificate is True, it returns a pair
boolean and certifi
Hi Luca,
On 2017-10-18, Luca De Feo wrote:
> However, what's the use of such a function with
> implementation-dependent outputs?
>
> If I understand Martin's argument correctly, he is saying that
> .reduce() *could* be used for a schoolbook "implementation of Gröbner
> basis algorithms in Sage wh
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 6:37 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:23 AM Thierry
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the dichotomy of the vote is not clear to me.
>>
>> I am -1 to make openssl a stantard package (hence shipped with the source
>> tarball), not only regarding licensing issues
On Sat, 14 Oct 2017, Jori Mantysalo wrote:
Just read Wikipedia page and found the term "traversable". It seems to
be less common than semi-eulerian... But a suggestion based on this:
Let's make four functions
- is_eulerian
- is_traversable
- is_hamiltonian
- is_traceable
Crosslink is_euleria
Dear Thierry,
Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 18:23:53 UTC+2, Thierry (sage-googlesucks@xxx)
a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> the dichotomy of the vote is not clear to me.
>
> I am -1 to make openssl a stantard package (hence shipped with the source
> tarball), not only regarding licensing issues but also fo
> I would formulate it more precisely as "no monomial in the output is
> divisible by the leading monomial of any polynomial in I". This seems
> to be true given the examples I have, it would be good to have a
> confirmation (hidden somewhere in Singular's docs?)
>
Curiously, the definition
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:23 AM Thierry
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the dichotomy of the vote is not clear to me.
>
> I am -1 to make openssl a stantard package (hence shipped with the source
> tarball), not only regarding licensing issues but also for security
> reasons: our "package manager" is such that
Dear Sage developers,
You can find a demo of live documentation on:
https://more-sagemath-tutorials.readthedocs.io/
Pick e.g. "Demo basics", click "Activate", and wait a bit. To evaluate
a cell, use shift-Enter as in Jupyter.
This was made possible by:
- Sage on mybinder, whic
Hi,
the dichotomy of the vote is not clear to me.
I am -1 to make openssl a stantard package (hence shipped with the source
tarball), not only regarding licensing issues but also for security
reasons: our "package manager" is such that packages can not be updated
unless Sage itself is updated (be
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 02:26:02AM -0700, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote:
>Fantastic!
>Thanks for your work on this.
:-)
Now I am looking forward a sage-manifolds live demo!
Amitiés,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil"
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message b
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:36:57AM +0200, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Quick question: does the use the Jupyter software from Sage or from binder
> itself?
It runs the Jupyter server within the container, which is that shipped
by Sage.
That made it easy to activate the Pari/* kernels by just installin
> I agree that Sage devs don't (need to) know what *exact* algorithm is
> used. But at least it is clear that the .reduce() method does polynomial
> reductions and continues till no further reduction is possible; all this
> for a fixed monomial ordering (determined by the polynomial ring), in
> *so
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 4:31:16 PM UTC+2, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote:
>
> Any example of an existing C++ / Sage interaction would also be
> appreciated.
>
src/sage/libs for example pynac, polybori, or singular
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Consider pybind11 as a (probably better) alternative to Boost Python:
https://pybind11.readthedocs.io/en/stable/
You will need a C++11 capable compiler, but the gains in terms of ease of
use, compilation speed and memory usage are IMO well worth it.
On 18 October 2017 at 16:31, Eric Gourgoulhon
Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 15:37:13 UTC+2, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby
Microwave Ltd) a écrit :
>
> On 18 October 2017 at 14:13, Erik Bray >
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
>> Note: We're not talking about adding *any* OpenSSL code to SageMath.
>>
Hi Luca,
On 2017-10-18, Luca De Feo wrote:
> I hate to sound snarky, but...
No offence taken...
> Yet, none of us seems to be able to second guess what kind of normal
> form is actually implemented by .reduce() (Singular's kNF, actually).
> And from the answers to this thread, it seems to me th
On 2017-10-18 16:31, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote:
Hi Sage Devs,
We plan to develop some experimental package for Sage, which requires to
make use of a C++ library (basically this is to implement numerical
calculus on manifolds). What would you recommend to make the link
between Sage (Python) code and
Hi Sage Devs,
We plan to develop some experimental package for Sage, which requires to
make use of a C++ library (basically this is to implement numerical
calculus on manifolds). What would you recommend to make the link between
Sage (Python) code and that library?
- Cython ?
- Boost ?
- ??
On 18 October 2017 at 14:13, Erik Bray wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
> Note: We're not talking about adding *any* OpenSSL code to SageMath.
> Sage would never be distributed with code from OpenSSL. We're only
> talking about providing a means to do
Hi Simon,
I hate to sound snarky, but...
> When reading `normal form` and `Groebner basis` in the same sentence,
> the meaning should be clear to anybody who took a course in commutative
> algebra. So, the question is: Whom should documentation be addressed to?
>
> I do *not* think that documenta
> The algorithm in question is described in “Ideals, Varieties, and
> Algorithms” by David Cox, John Little and Donal O’Shea in Section "§3 A
> Division Algorithm in k[x_1 , … , x_n]".
It is not:
sage: A. = PolynomialRing(QQ, order="lex")
sage: (x*y^2 + 1).reduce([x*y + 1, y+1])
x + 1
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd) wrote:
> On 18 Oct 2017 00:39, "William Stein" wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 4:35 PM Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd)
>> wrote:
>
>>> There are a lot of number theorists using Sagemath. Could one or more
>
Nice!
--
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
V
On 2017-10-18 01:38, William Stein wrote:
Absolutely not. That's not how security software works (and would be
insulting to the OpenSSL developers). You are **epically**
understimating what OpenSSL is and does.
+1
Implementing crypto in practice is very different from implementing a
toy R
Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 11:52:47 UTC+2, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby
Microwave Ltd) a écrit :
>
> On 18 Oct 2017 00:39, "William Stein" >
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 4:35 PM Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) <
> drki...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk > wrote:
>
> >> There are a lo
On 18 Oct 2017 00:39, "William Stein" wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 4:35 PM Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) <
drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote:
>> There are a lot of number theorists using Sagemath. Could one or more
consider implementing the functionality of OpenSSL in a re-w
On Wednesday, 18 October 2017 03:35:15 UTC+2, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> On 10/17/2017 08:42 PM, Maarten Derickx wrote:
> >
> > What makes you think their process is dubious? They are reaching out for
> > consent from all people who have contributed, and they have removed the
> > code from t
Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 10:58:28 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit :
>
> On 2017-10-18 03:08, William Stein wrote:
> > (a) using a broken version of the Python/R/Sage stack that exposes
> > them to installing malware
>
> Is that really the case? I think pip is actually fail-safe in the sense
Quick question: does the use the Jupyter software from Sage or from
binder itself?
--
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegr
Fantastic!
Thanks for your work on this.
Best regards,
Eric.
--
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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to
Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 10:58:28 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit :
>
> On 2017-10-18 03:08, William Stein wrote:
> > (a) using a broken version of the Python/R/Sage stack that exposes
> > them to installing malware
>
> Is that really the case? I think pip is actually fail-safe in the sense
I think the elaboration part of the "Yes" option was not very carefully
worded, this is what Michael pointed out.
We cannot HOST OpenSSL source (this is illegal with its present license),
but nothing prevents us from providing means to install it legally.
To be on a safe side with binary distribu
Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 10:51:21 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit :
>
> On 2017-10-18 03:08, William Stein wrote:
> > The choice for users installing the Sage binary is between:
>
> So you are worried about *binaries*? Are there any distros that we ship
> binaries for that *don't* have a system
First of all, I think that your email is unfair because it presents the
"Yes" option as something that we could just easily do. However, as
mentioned in another post in this thread, the "Yes" option might
actually be illegal.
So my vote is "No".
--
You received this message because you are su
On Wednesday, October 18, 2017 at 9:51:21 AM UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2017-10-18 03:08, William Stein wrote:
> > The choice for users installing the Sage binary is between:
>
> So you are worried about *binaries*? Are there any distros that we ship
> binaries for that *don't* have a
On 2017-10-18 03:08, William Stein wrote:
(a) using a broken version of the Python/R/Sage stack that exposes
them to installing malware
Is that really the case? I think pip is actually fail-safe in the sense
that it simply refuses to download if OpenSSL is not supported. So there
is no expo
On 2017-10-18 03:08, William Stein wrote:
The choice for users installing the Sage binary is between:
So you are worried about *binaries*? Are there any distros that we ship
binaries for that *don't* have a systemwide OpenSSL installed by default?
--
You received this message because you are
Thank you guys for your help. It worked :)
What confused me was that there were two merge conflicts. One between the
two branches and one between them and the latest beta version.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe
43 matches
Mail list logo