Ok, I made this commit:
https://github.com/sagemath/website/commit/3e119757cf08ac8487351905f738bd6c31dcc216
to provide http://www.sagemath.org/files/test.sobj
Does this help?
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 4:02 PM Sébastien Labbé wrote:
>
>
> > I've no idea what "test.sobj" is.
>
> You may recreate the
> I've no idea what "test.sobj" is.
You may recreate the file test.sobj like this:
sage: s = 'hello SageMath'
sage: save(s, 'test.sobj')
sage: ls
test.sobj
Then this works:
sage: s = load('test.sobj')
sage: s
'hello SageMath'
Harald, can you create the file test.sobj as above and upload it to
On 08/29/2018 01:14 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2018-08-29 13:11, Daniel Krenn wrote:
>> Shouldn't we simply use
>> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26150
>> ?
>
> How is conversion from the symbolic related to evaluating "r" as the R
> interpreter?
Fair enough, this is now
https://trac.s
On 2018-08-29 13:11, Daniel Krenn wrote:
Shouldn't we simply use
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26150
?
How is conversion from the symbolic related to evaluating "r" as the R
interpreter?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
T
On 08/29/2018 12:59 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Can you create a ticket for this such that we can discuss it there?
Shouldn't we simply use
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26150
?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe
Can you create a ticket for this such that we can discuss it there?
--
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 pos
On 08/29/2018 12:39 PM, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> In the element_constructor, there is the following (extracted):
> sage: sage_eval('r', QQ['x'].fraction_field().gens_dict_recursive())
> R Interpreter
> My intuition says that this should fail.
For clearification, not the paricular command above,
On 08/29/2018 10:13 AM, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> A simple fix in
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26150
> (fraction field: fix conversion from symbolic ring)
> turns out to have an side effect in function_field:
>
> File "src/sage/rings/function_field/function_field.py", line 1602, in
> sage.ring
A simple fix in
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26150
(fraction field: fix conversion from symbolic ring)
turns out to have an side effect in function_field:
File "src/sage/rings/function_field/function_field.py", line 1602, in
sage.rings.function_field.function_field.FunctionField_polymod.hom
Hi Travis,
On 2018-08-28, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
> You might find this useful:
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3323001/what-is-the-maximum-recursion-depth-in-python-and-how-to-increase-it
Thank you! But I suppose it is better to reimplement the recursion by a loop.
I did already, and it
Hi Dima,
On 2018-08-29, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> I think this machinery is much better implemented in Macaulay2.
I'll have a look, thank you!
For now, I did implement something myself: Based on Singular, but all
manipulations of integer polynomials is done in Sage. The question is if
I should pu
11 matches
Mail list logo
