Let's prepare the release tour for the upcoming 9.2 release by
collaborative editing.
https://wiki.sagemath.org/ReleaseTours/sage-9.2
--
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
On Saturday, August 8, 2020 at 4:54:46 AM UTC-7, Furkan Semih Dündar wrote:
>
> I opened a ticket a few months ago: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29915
>
> The basic idea is that Sage should be able to solve an n'th order ode
> numerically without the user defining it as a system of n 1st order
I have prepared an upgrade ticket for Jupyter notebook and dependencies at
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/26919, which needs testing. (The branch
also contains the fix from #30299 for the broken notebook.)
On Friday, August 7, 2020 at 9:54:05 AM UTC-7, Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>
> There's no
Dear All,
I opened a ticket a few months ago: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/29915
The basic idea is that Sage should be able to solve an n'th order ode
numerically without the user defining it as a system of n 1st order ode's.
I have free time in the upcoming weeks and would like to contribut
Hello,
This is definitely a bug. Thanks for the report. I opened
the ticket #30319 to track the issue, see
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30319
Note that if you use rational coordinates, it looks fine. With
a = Polyhedron([[0, -1, 1], [1, -1, 1], [1, 1, -1]])
b = Polyhedron([[0, -1/2, 3/
Hello,
I have found that sage finds a non-zero intersection between polygons when
they are parallel but non-intersecting. A reproducible example:
```
# Define parallel polygons.
a = Polyhedron([[0, -1, 1], [1, -1, 1], [1, 1, -1]])
b = Polyhedron([[0.0, -0.5, 1.5], [1.0, -0.5, 1.5], [1.0, 1.5, -0.
