Hah, this made me smile in the morning ;)
Cheers,
Michael
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Maxima] [sage-devel] compiling Maxima by ECL
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:46:54 +0200
From: Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Michael.Abshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Richard Fateman wrote:
>
Hello,
>
>> The paramount reason to attempt to go with ecl instead of gcl
>> or clisp
>> [only self-hosted, build from source, Open Source lisps need
>> apply :)]
>
> As I've mentioned previously, this seems to me an arbitrary requirement;
Yes, I am well awa
nything in a Turing
> sense.
Yes :)
> Regards
> RJF
Cheers,
Michael
>
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael.Abshoff
>> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 8:53 PM
>> To: sage-devel@googlegr
Robert Dodier wrote:
> Hello,
Hi,
> I have gotten Maxima (current CVS head + ECL-specific changes)
> compiled by ECL (current CVS head, release 0.9j won't work).
> I committed the ECL-specific stuff on the branch patches-for-ecl-branch
> in Maxima CVS. I merged in a patch posted by Michael Goffi
root wrote:
> Gary,
Hi Tim,
> If you're interested in exploring Axiom's type system
> the best source of material available is the Jenk's book.
> It would be useful if Sage's type hierarchy was close to
> the one Axiom uses, making it possible to share algorithms.
> If you'll mail me a postal a
Andrzej Giniewicz wrote:
> One test failed on standard rc1+clisp...p15, running 32 bit Arch linux
> with GCC 4.3, /proc/cpuinfo below and doctest below it.
>
> cheers,
> Andrzej.
>
> and only test that failed:
>
> sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/complex_double.pyx
> ***
[this email will likely bounce somewhere, so if it doesn't show up in
some place please forward]
Martin Rubey wrote:
> Dear Michael,
Hi Martin,
> just a short recap, whether I have understood things correctly:
>
>the problem you currently face with external symbolic calculus is that the
>
Ryan Hinton wrote:
>
Ryan, folks,
> I know Sage 3.0 is coming up soon. Please consider this a friendly
> reminder that someone (me) is excited to have Sage run on FreeBSD!
>
> Thanks!
The quickest way to get this port going again is to provide me with a
VMWare image (preferably 64 bit) and
Brian Granger wrote:
Hi Brian,
>> Sure and it is certainly good to be discussed. I didn't want to be
>> dismissive about the idea, it is just that I have been in the "debugging
>> memory leaks in Cython extension" trenches for the last eight months and
>> hence I do not trust python or its m
Brian Granger wrote:
Hi Brian,
>> Well, in the end you end up using sbrk() anyway, but I don't see what is
>> wrong with malloc itself? sage_malloc was introduced a while back to
>> make it possible to switch to a slab allocator like omalloc potentially
>> to see if there is any benefit from
William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Michael.Abshoff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > But, test test suite doesn't test for all of the odd input that users
>> > will feed to sage. These are the cases that will leak memory and
>> &g
Brian Granger wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:27 AM, Michael.Abshoff
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Brian Granger wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>>
Hi Brian,
>>
>>> (dual posted to sage and cython)
>>&
Brian Granger wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Brian,
> (dual posted to sage and cython)
>
> A few of us (ipython and mpi4py devs) are wondering what the
> best/safest way of allocating dynamic memory in a local scope
> (method/function) is when using cython. An example would be if you
> need an array of c int
Jaap Spies wrote:
> Hi,
>
> From my IRC log:
>
> Not in detail. I downloaded the patch and looked at it a
> little.
> But it is obviously huge.
> I was going to add stuff about the preparser at sd8 since
> they seemed to want to know about it.
> But since it increases coverage by 2% I am sur
danielbrst wrote:
> thank you for answered
>
>
Please do not take discussions private.
> i don't find anywhere the way :/home/sage/.sage .there is any folder
> with the sage name .
>
> perhaps a probleme of installation ?
>
>
I haven't checked the VMWare image myself, but the above direc
David Harvey wrote:
> On Feb 21, 2008, at 10:15 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> this is 2.10.2.rc0, which hopefully will be identical to 2.10.2
>> final.
>> Please build and doctest this release and report any issue you
>> come across. At this point only critical issues will be patche
16 matches
Mail list logo
