Hi all,
I recently upgraded the cookiecutter at
https://github.com/mmasdeu/sage_package_template and it works with Sage 9.0
and Travis CI. This could be made to work with Github actions as well, and
I would push to improving this one instead of sage_sample. Note that
something like sage_sample
com
-
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2017-08-23 17:44, Marc Masdeu wrote:
>>
>> I know that there is several people who think that this is not the way
>> that code should
t; - "7.6"
> - "8.0"
> }}}
>
> What need to be done
>
> 1) have 3 "official" person in charge of maintenance (with me being ok, we
> need 2 more)
>
> 2) provide a pull request to travis-build and travis-web
>
> Best
> Vince
After some work (building upon github.com/sagemath/sage_sample) that some
of us did during Sage Days 87 and the Leiden workshop that took place a few
weeks ago, I'd like to collect some feedback / pull requests on a first
attempt at making it super easy for anyone to get their own working
GitHu
@Simon maybe it would help the OP if you elaborated on why the group
cohomology code was not included in the standard Sage...
@Nikhil I would suggest that you concentrate in writing useful code in
ergodic theory. How to distribute it is secondary, IMO. For ease of
development, you definitely do
> I think we would be happy to make things public. I’ve cc’d David Roe,
who is organizing. Personally, I think it would be better though to copy
all content that
> should be public to a normal cocalc.com project, and make it public
there, since that way the URL will be valid forever (since t
I'm just back from Sage Days 87 in Burlington, VT, where I gave a talk on
how to deal with this issue, precisely using sage_sample (you can find the
slides here
https://www.slideshare.net/mmasdeu/distributing-sage-python-code-the-right-way).
Participants seemed to buy the solution. I think that
The function ps_modsym_from_simple_modsym_space calls internally a
randomized method from modular symbols (dual_eigenvector). Here is a
snippet of code that also returns different answers depending on the seed
(on a fresh session, since dual_eigenvector gets cached).
f = Newforms(32, 8, names='
coming year.
>
> Well all this rant and marketing is just to advocate that sage keeps its
> ability to link against
> various libraries and be able to select the best code available at the
> moment.
>
> Best
> Clément
>
> Le 13/08/2014 15:32, Martin Albrecht a
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 2:08 PM, William A Stein wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 13, 2014, Marc Masdeu wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:17:55 PM UTC+1, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 8:06:02 PM UTC+2
On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:17:55 PM UTC+1, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 8:06:02 PM UTC+2, wstein wrote:
>>
>> Hi -- Another question. You just deleted this [1] below -- does flint
>> really solidly beat it?
>>
>
> FLINT uses the same formula for 4x4 determinants
nteger_dense')
> cdef Matrix_integer_dense res =
> self._new_uninitialized_matrix(self._nrows, self._ncols)
> self._hnf_modn(res, D)
> - verbose('finished hnf mod', t, caller_name='matrix_integer_dense')
>
> william
>
> >
> > Cheers,
Hi,
Recently I noticed that Sage was not using fmpz_mat_t for matrices
(probably when FLINT was incorporated in Sage it didn't yet have this). I
have opened a ticket (http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16803 --thanks
pbruin!--) with a patch that reimplements matrix_integer_dense with FLINT,
and i
13 matches
Mail list logo
