For the question about seeing which version of maxima is used by calculus
(through the ECL backend):
maxima_calculus.version()
On Wednesday, 30 July 2025 at 19:01:50 UTC+2 Antonio Rojas wrote:
The maxima command issue us caused by an incomplete SBCL upgrade and should
be already fixed. The Sag
Thanks! This worked for me once I told sage to NOT use the system ecl: it
is configured to use GCC15 (and I don't see how to change that), which then
leads to problems with building maxima. Building your own ecl does lead to
an ecl that uses gcc-14, which then builds maxima without problems.
On
On Thursday, 3 July 2025 at 17:25:48 UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
This file /usr/lib64/libflint.so.19 does exist.
Apologies. Does NOT exist.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiv
This ended up not quite working for me anymore. The "build" didn't produce
an error, but sage crashes upon startup because:
...
File "sage/algebras/quatalg/quaternion_algebra_cython.pyx", line 1, in
init sage.algebras.quatalg.quaternion_algebra_cython
# distutils: language = c++
ImportErro
I would say: `_element_constructor_` is an underscored method, so it's not
really a public-facing routine: by default it's not the place to put
documentation for users (tests and formal description is fine, though).
Instead, you'd write the documentation in the class documentation. That
would b
I noticed that sagemath's
https://github.com/sagemath?view_as=public
still lists "transition from trac to github" as recent under the
announcements. This was completed more than two years ago so perhaps we
shouldn't announce it as recent any more. Hopefully it's quick to update
for someone who
Thanks! that's a useful tip. When do you need repeat this? For any make?
just configure? just bootstrap?
--
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-deve
I'm getting this error from configure for sage:
real_configure: Installing GCC because g++ -std=gnu++11 is g++ version 15,
which is too recent for this version of Sage
no building sage on Fedora 42 yet?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel"
On Monday, 28 April 2025 at 12:56:36 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
this is from https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35119
a part of a push towards namespace packages to certainly ill-conceived
modularization project.
I don't think the origin of the change is so relevant (other than the
rep
I ran into the following worrisome example. In
sage.rings.finite_rings.element_base we have that is_FiniteFieldElement(x)
has a deprecation on it:
deprecation(32664, "the function is_FiniteFieldElement is deprecated;
use isinstance(x, sage.structure.element.FieldElement) and
x.parent().is_f
e that the relation between OK and K
> should be similar to the relation between ZZ and QQ, so there shouldn't be
> any need for elements of OK to inherit from FieldElement.
>
> On Sunday, April 27, 2025 at 11:06:03 PM UTC-4 Nils Bruin wrote:
>
>> I ran into the following pr
I ran into the following problem for elements of rings of integers: they
inherit from FieldElement. That's a problem when, for instance you want to
implement a method "canonical_associate" that tries to find a canonical
representative modulo multiplication by units. For fields, such a thing is
I tried a conda-based install because I wanted to try some development on a
machine with questionable rerequisites. Indeed, conda provided all prereqs
very smoothly. On
https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/installation/conda.html
the use of pip is advertised as superior to "make" and it has the fol
On Friday, 18 April 2025 at 10:07:12 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
Nobody is going to "break" anything. You'll just need a proper Python to
install Sage, like one of many pre-reqs already needed.
It's just fear-mongering. Building Sage will be less broken this way, not
more broken.
It looks to
On Tuesday, 15 April 2025 at 08:45:53 UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
Note that AA was bolted onto QQbar at a later stage. Root finding over AA
is currently probably implemented by root finding over QQbar and then
seeing which roots lie in AA. In principle it's possible to not do it that
way
On Tuesday, 15 April 2025 at 03:48:25 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
Just trying to show that real roots can be easily computed, not
relying on the bugs in roots over QQbar.
I don't see way to control the precision in the spectrum.
The trick with QQbar: there IS no precision to control. The sys
On Monday, 14 April 2025 at 10:05:20 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
I continue to think this is at least one bug.
There is an easy fix via change_ring():
sage:
M=F.adjacency_matrix();f=M.characteristic_polynomial();f=f.change_ring(AA)
: ;ro=f.roots();sum(e for _,e in ro)
90
I'm not
On Monday, 14 April 2025 at 09:16:49 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
One would wish there was a way to tell the system from the beginning
that this particular polynomial has only real roots.
Perhaps there is an easy way to implement is (a class of real-rooted
polynomials), no?
Dima
Well, the
It looks like a is an element of "Qbar". Elements there are tracked by
keeping track of a way to compute a polynomial it is a root of as well as a
complex "ball" that allows one to distinguish it from other roots of the
polynomial. Certain operations will force the actual computation of the
min
On Friday, 11 April 2025 at 15:55:39 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
The obvious questions which this raises and which have still not been
answered here are: What is so wrong with this process? Why do we have to
break it? Why can't we at least leave the Sage spkg in place until there
is an
On Wednesday, 9 April 2025 at 16:44:31 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
As I already explained, it's quite a stretch by Sage's standards to call
python3 package standard. Because it is not tested enough;
because few months into release, the supposedly stable Sage release is
often not installable,
On Monday, 7 April 2025 at 08:59:40 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
If the Python spkg were removed we would no longer be able to start from a
standard build of Sage.
Can you explain what the non-standard part would be and why you are
concerned it would be more fragile on the side of Sage? To m
On Wednesday, 9 April 2025 at 12:15:07 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
No, this won't fly. This is going to break the already fragile logic
behind package types.
Standard packages cannot be optionally installed, so it can't stay
standard. Optional packages probably cannot appear in toolchain.
P
On Monday, 7 April 2025 at 09:17:18 UTC-7 David Lowry-Duda wrote:
Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but we already have --with-system-python3 that
defaults to "yes", right? Is this different than the proposed
--install_own_python option?
I would expect that the flag *prefers* a system python that me
It looks to me that there are two points of view here.
1) Having sagemath detect python version requirements and build its own if
not acceptable version is found leads to increased support requests.
2) The macos app should package its own python and that is conveniently
done by letting sagemath
On
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39812
I see all CI tests failing. In the log it seems that the failure already
happens in building the Docker image. "Explain Error" mentions that there's
a sphinx version requirement conflict in the log somewhere. That sounds
like a configuration error
I do recall a system python upgrade on Fedora a while ago where python was
replaced/updated in a way that was binary incompatible. As a result, my
source-built sage was rendered non-functional. Recompiling worked but of
course "make" wouldn't find which prerequisites were changed and hence
whic
On Monday, 31 March 2025 at 17:38:06 UTC-7 Trevor Karn wrote:
What was the original intent behind having the dual requirements of (i) a
system python and (ii) a SPKG python both in Sage? What (once upon a time)
did having a SKPG do that couldn't/shouldn't/wouldn't be done by the system
python?
In the past I've build sagelib in parallel, with
export MAKE="make -j8"
make -j8 build
This seems to still work for the prerequisites, but for building sagelib
everything slows to an agonizing one job at a time. Did something change
here? I can't find anything in the documentation other than th
No, sorry. I should have included that this is on fedora (40 at the moment).
On Sunday, 23 March 2025 at 16:24:09 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2025 at 11:57:39AM -0700, Nils Bruin wrote:
> > In the past I've build sagelib in parallel, with
> >
>
For historical reference, both implementations were incorporated in sage in
feb/march 2008:
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/COEXL3dyBS8
It looks like implementing DLX is a finnish thing :-). From the thread, I
don't get the impression there is any reason to prefer the python
implement
I noticed that sage presently has two implementations of DLX:
- a toy one implemented in python:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/9cd86e9596a6d996611cd7cc9281ac5a95fda89c/src/sage/combinat/dlx.py
- a wrapper of a C++ implementation:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/9cd86e9596a6d996611
On Tuesday, 11 February 2025 at 23:15:10 UTC-8 Georgi Guninski wrote:
On the mirror I see:
sage-10.5.tar.gz torrent 1535.20 MB 2024-12-04 00:28
MD5: 83dab794f87e989a30e248f3b39c40db
There are several potential issues with this:
1. If the mirror is compromised or MITM'ed, it could provide wh
There's an interesting one in
./build/sage_bootstrap/download/mirror_list.py:
URL = 'http://www.sagemath.org/mirror_list'
which would probably be better as https. Because of the checksums I don't
think there's much direct risk from it, but it does open up sage-generated
traffic to theoretical M
/polynomial/padics/polynomial_padic_capped_relative_dense.py#L576-L577
it shouldn't be too hard to fix that? Someone with some experience with the
code there could probably fix that quite easily.
On Friday, 24 January 2025 at 13:38:27 UTC-8 Nils Bruin wrote:
> On https://github.com/sagem
On https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39371 I found that R['x'] knows
how to find the scalar multiplication action of R on R['x'] in most cases,
but that for R=Qp this is not the case. It looks like there are some
benefits from relying on such an action, so it would be nice if this action
we
On Friday, 24 January 2025 at 11:28:42 UTC-8 axio...@yahoo.de wrote:
To do this, it is very helpful that unfinished tickets are *not* closed,
because this gives me the "interesting" tickets with a single click: I hide
all the closed ones. Usually only a few remain, and the older among those
te
On Wednesday, 22 January 2025 at 20:30:46 UTC-8 jackson...@gmail.com wrote:
I had a similar thought but didn’t know if it was possible. I don’t really
understand the idea of being religious about not touching someone’s PR if
they were the one that opened it. Surely just getting the code finished
If you're really targeting beginners, I'd say jupyterlab notebooks. One
step up: put your code in a separate file and load/import it all through
the jupyterlab environment. It comes with a text editor.
Ideally, you'd have a jupyterhub deployment available so that your
participants can start wit
Are you interested in the giac that is used by a command like "giac(1)"?
That starts up a separate process, so if you use something like "ps ax"
you'll get a line like:
1936931 pts/11 Ssl+ 0:00 /usr/bin/giac --sage
which tells you which binary is running.
On Saturday, 4 January 2025 at 2
On Thursday, 12 December 2024 at 12:39:46 UTC-8 axio...@yahoo.de wrote:
Great, thank you! This - almost - provides a performance test:
Yes, you would need to convince sage that this is indeed a euclidean ring
(I think for this one the usual norm actually is a euclidean norm). I don't
think tha
Quadratic rings perhaps? A fair number of those are UFD:
sage: K.=NumberField(x^2-3)
sage: O=K.ring_of_integers()
sage: b=O(a-2)
sage: %timeit b.is_unit()
664 ns ± 4.24 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1,000,000 loops each)
sage: %timeit b.is_one()
55.8 ns ± 0.214 ns per loop (mean ± std.
Read on for the other failures. If you look up line 1953, you'll see it's
inside a try/except. You're triggering the KeyError, so it's the outer one
for you. That's the code that's trying to fill the cache, but it fails. The
rest of the traceback is of THAT error (it is saying "During handling o
The original reason for making UniqueRepresentation parents was for the
coercion framework: If parents are UniqueRepresentation you can use
equality-by-id and hash them super-easy (by id). Hence they can be looked
up quickly and we can key lookup of coercion-maps easily on fast hashes and
ident
n that ends up looking
superficially as functional but not actually a tested-good version.
On Friday 1 November 2024 at 03:02:51 UTC-7 mmarco wrote:
> How do I fix a version requirement?
>
> El viernes, 1 de noviembre de 2024 a las 8:03:28 UTC+1, Nils Bruin
> escribió:
>
>> On Thu
On Thursday 31 October 2024 at 03:55:41 UTC-7 mmarco wrote:
I recently released a new version of libbraiding that exposes new
functionality, in order to use those new functions from Sage (see #38887).
However, the CI tests fail because they use the old version (taken from the
system, instead o
On Wednesday 16 October 2024 at 06:43:30 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
sage: Kx.=QQ[]
sage: I=Ideal([x*y])
sage: gb=I.groebner_basis(algorithm='singular:stdfglm')
TypeError: Singular error:
? The ideal i has to be 0-dimensional
I believe computing the dimension of ideal requires computing gr
On Thursday 10 October 2024 at 09:02:58 UTC-7 sinan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I would like to report the following:
I tried to integrate 1/x^2 from -oo to oo, and here is what I got:
--
In cocalc, the series is calculated wrongly:
'SageMath version 10.4, Release Date: 2024-07-19'
in: integral(1/x
On Wednesday 9 October 2024 at 09:31:45 UTC-7 giaco...@gmail.com wrote:
1. This will be a very large PR, is this generally an OK thing to do?
Generally smaller PRs are easier to get merged, but I'm not sure if merging
n PRs of size m takes more or less time than merging one PR of size n*m. If
On Tuesday 8 October 2024 at 15:40:07 UTC-7 oscar.j@gmail.com wrote:
> As you're pointing out, sage still fits within 10GB in source, so it
looks like sagemath could just be one pypi package.
I think that you have misunderstood the limits that Marc was referring
to. The 100MB file limits m
On Tuesday 8 October 2024 at 13:20:54 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 1:23:55 PM UTC-6 Nils Bruin wrote:
- the examples we have of bits of software developed as part of sage that
ended up as library components of other projects are peripheral,
interfacing parts
Summarizing what I've seen come by here:
- the examples we have of bits of software developed as part of sage that
ended up as library components of other projects are peripheral,
interfacing parts that were spun off into independent libraries.
- we don't have examples of core functionality
On Monday 7 October 2024 at 06:26:52 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
A concrete example of a useful standalone Sage module is CyPari2. By
including CyPari within SnapPy we are able to make it possible to compute
number theoretic invariants of hyperbolic manifolds. We are unable to use
Sage's
On Tuesday 17 September 2024 at 07:04:18 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
that's the legacy of developing software in a platform-independent
machine assembly language
known as C or C++, or Fortran :-)
Then, as we know, Greenspun's tenth rule states that:
Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortra
On Monday 16 September 2024 at 06:20:37 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
Maybe fighting leaks should start at developer level, then QA.
Waiting to see gigabytes missing in a minute is a very crude way
to recognize leak.
It's very common for computer algebra packages to have memory leaks,
particu
On Sunday 15 September 2024 at 10:46:06 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
> You can grab one of those objects on the heap and look at its
backreference graph
How does one do that?
You can grab one of the objects:
next(a for a in gc.get_objects() if id(a) not in pre and str(type(a)) ==
"")
(
On Sunday 15 September 2024 at 10:08:18 UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote:
For me this code is rather unpredictable, as ipython and prompt_toolkit
kick in
and produce extra objects.
For consistency (at least them the output values are reproducible)
it looks better to experiment with Sage's python
On Sunday 8 September 2024 at 13:18:40 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
As I said above this does not happen with either cypari or cypari2 when
using getno.
This is not a cypari issue. The issue is that Sage creates a "unique"
object for each new number field, where new means that the input par
This example is definitely leaving loads of stuff on the python heap, so if
there is a leak onto the cython heap then it is not the only one. My guess
would be an interaction with the coercion system or UniqueRepresentation,
which both keeps global weak references to objects. If the key informat
On Tuesday 3 September 2024 at 23:53:33 UTC-7 john wrote:
Indeed, Magma's AlgebraicallyClosedField is not embedded into CC; it also
has no version of AA. And Nils meant what he said about large *finite*
fields being used to keep track. I find QQbar easier to use -- but
when Magma's Algebraica
On Tuesday 3 September 2024 at 20:52:04 UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
If you mean "branch choice" in mathematical sense, the branch choice of
Qbar (and CC and RR)
ln(z) = ln(r) + i * theta for z = r * exp(i * theta) with r > 0, -pi <
theta <= pi
(note <= at the end) is most natural for maximal con
On Tuesday 3 September 2024 at 19:44:43 UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
I think that only valid argument for AA(-1)^(1/3) = -1 is that it is the
status quo. It is just human that likes what she/he used to. Removing
inconsistency is for the future.
The fact that powers with odd denominator do not leav
On Tuesday 3 September 2024 at 09:08:06 UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
That in Python one has non-real value for (-1)**(1/3) is
two things: 1/3 is actually a float, and absence of typing.
These are artifacts of the programming language, and make little sense
mathematically.
Do you mean that the va
On Thursday 29 August 2024 at 09:51:04 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
I observe that the following does not leak:
E=EllipticCurve([5*13,0]) #no leak
rn=E.root_number()
How do you know that doesn't leak? Do you mean that repeated execution of
those commands in the same session does not swell m
The leakage does not seem to be happening on the python heap. A next step
could be to see if cypari's stack is swelling.
On Thursday 29 August 2024 at 02:34:06 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
> In short:
> ```
> for A2 in range(1, 10**5):
> E=EllipticCurve([A2,0])
> rn=E.root_number()
> ```
> leaks
On Tuesday 27 August 2024 at 05:42:55 UTC-7 vdelecroix wrote:
This is indeed annoying. For further input, notice that python gives
the complex principal root rather than the real root
>>> (-1.) ** 0.33
(0.5090414157503712+0.8607420270039436j)
I'm not sure that's a completely fair comparison
ppe wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 1:48:39 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
>>
>> On the google groups comment linked to by the second reference you give,
>> Dima does link to a very explicit proposal that does share substantial
>> features with the proposed p
On Wednesday 21 August 2024 at 15:29:05 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 2:12:30 PM UTC-7 tobia...@gmx.de wrote:
> the version constraints of the packages that happen to be build
dependencies of the Sage library (enumerated in
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/d
On Wednesday 21 August 2024 at 13:16:48 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
On Wednesday, August 21, 2024 at 7:33:26 AM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I don't consider this approved, as my complaint about the previous
discussions and related proposals and credits due is not addressed
I'll note that extr
On Wednesday 21 August 2024 at 12:36:02 UTC-7 GMS wrote:
I think the clash is much more basic than that.
It is developers versus users. Users who hoped to do (some) mathematics
with a computer.
So far, it seems to me most discussions are developer-centric, Marc being
among the exceptions giv
On Wednesday 21 August 2024 at 09:09:22 UTC-7 Frédéric Chapoton wrote:
TypeError: C function sage.misc.randstate.current_randstate has wrong
signature (expected struct __pyx_obj_4sage_4misc_9randstate_randstate *(int
__pyx_skip_dispatch), got struct __pyx_obj_9randstate_randstate *(int
__pyx_s
On Wednesday 21 August 2024 at 08:03:03 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 8:22:35 PM UTC-5 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
it is not a bad idea for a non-developer user to install sage from source.
I disagree. It *is* a bad idea, for so many reasons:
* It requires a lot of tim
On Tuesday 20 August 2024 at 06:54:00 UTC-7 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
[...]
As a distro package, tachyon is mildly annoying, but all that it really
needs is a sane build system. The existing one is a case study in what
happens when you try to recreate autotools in undocumented Makefile
fragments.
On Tuesday 20 August 2024 at 10:03:59 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
On Tuesday, August 20, 2024 at 9:02:14 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org wrote:
I consider this approved.
While I don't think I would be opposed to the proposal here, I believe that
our policy says that for a disputed PR to be "appr
It's unfortunate that tachyon isn't maintained properly. It's a nice piece
of software. It looks like it has been adopted by VMD (software developed
by the biophysics group at Illinois -- it looks like the software is
opensource and available without cost, but is under a restrictive licence,
so
l be discovered independently and get its own non-derivative tests. So I
don't think many people bother to specify licenses for bug reports.
On Wednesday 31 July 2024 at 09:52:27 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 7:32 PM Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> This is now:
>
> https
This is now:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/38459
On Wednesday 31 July 2024 at 08:46:14 UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 July 2024 at 07:33:47 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
>
> I need non-torsion element of Jacobian of hyperelliptic curve,
> would someone give exampl
On Wednesday 31 July 2024 at 07:33:47 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
I need non-torsion element of Jacobian of hyperelliptic curve,
would someone give example?
IIRC something very close to the following worked about
5 years ago, but now I get trivial result.
Session:
#Author: Georgi Guninski
The irreducible_components gives an answer that is consistent with magma: C
is a complete intersection of two hypersurfaces in A4 and hence of
dimension 2 itself. Looks like "Curve" over QQ doesn't check dimension or
delegates to a routine that doesn't check properly.
On Tuesday 23 July 2024 at
That's an ... interesting ... way to do a division, but sure: also in prime
cyclic groups represented as an additive group discrete log algorithms
should work.
When I try your example on a version that is reported as 10.3.beta3, I'm
not getting an error, so you'll probably have to include versi
On Saturday 11 May 2024 at 09:58:38 UTC-7 Georgi Guninski wrote:
The following hurt my computations.
```
#Author Georgi Guninski, Sat May 11 04:53:23 PM UTC 2024
p=101;
Kt.=Integers(p)[]
c5,s5=((100*t^10 + 45*t^8 + 93*t^6 + 8*t^4 + 56*t^2 + 1)/(t^10 + 5*t^8
+ 10*t^6 + 10*t^4 + 5*t^2 + 1), (
On Wednesday 1 May 2024 at 16:45:36 UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
I wonder if they, maintainers of maxima, would regard this as a bug...
I'm pretty sure the piecewise functions are NOT borrowed from maxima. It
probably gets called because there are some inequalities concerning the
symbolic ring.
Working on *why* it might be so slow a bit:
%prun for i in range(100r): f(0.1)
798103 function calls (791903 primitive calls) in 1.327 seconds
Ordered by: internal time
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
80000.5560.0000.6280.0
On Friday 26 April 2024 at 15:44:22 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see what difference the choice of port makes to a user. It is not
possible to guarantee that the same port will always be used, since ports
are assigned on a first-come first-served basis. Consequently it is not
possi
On Friday 26 April 2024 at 12:29:14 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
There are other issues with viewing local documentation files in a
browser. On Ubuntu, Chrome and Firefox are packaged as snaps. A snap is
not allowed to read a file:// url which is not in the user's home
directory. As long
On Friday 26 April 2024 at 06:53:28 UTC-7 marc@gmail.com wrote:
I have a suggestion to improve the situation, which is to do what the
Sage_macOS app does.
The app provides access to a local copy of the documentation stored inside
the application bundle. The files are reorganized slightly t
+1 to merge #37796.
--
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 view this discussion on the web visit
https://grou
Thanks. It looks like the error occurs in integralbasis.lib. It's last
version data is fairly recent, so the file may be under active maintenance.
sagemath has grown enough divisor machinery that it can probably compute a
conic model of a genus 0 curve, which would be more standard to try and
p
Also not that there is plenty of code that, in the course of computation,
writes into attributes of objects. If you're doing multiple of those it's
very hard in python to make such a modification atomic. So if an interrupt
ends up splitting an update, you may leave the system in an inconsistent
Dima,
I am writing as a member of the Code of Conduct concerning one particular
phrase from your message
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/Wjw2wcvgf8k/m/ynwiz66_AQAJ :
> This will force Matthias to reconsider his priorities, and enable other
voices to be heard. So far, Matthias refuses
Thank you, Matthias, for drawing attention to votes on tickets that have
gained "disputed" state and were not getting much attention. If we're going
to decide these tickets by voting, then having a more representative voting
population should help in getting a more representative result.
Thank
One scenario where I could see this being beneficial:
These configurations are written into `$HOME/.sage` (normally), so that is
not a location that is predicated by a venv or a localized subdir. If a
user is using two different sagemath installs (e.g., one system, the other
for development) tha
On Sunday 24 March 2024 at 04:41:25 UTC-7 Przemysław Koprowski wrote:
Let me just comment on your words "searching the source, this routine isn't
actually used elsewhere in sage" (here:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37657). It is not entirely true,
because, as far as I know, the method
Thanks! this is now
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/37656
or
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37657
(I'm still a bit murky on what issues are used for)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this grou
On Friday 22 March 2024 at 11:22:12 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
10 days ago, the previous maintainer, Vincent Delecroix, announced that he
steps down from maintaining it.
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/fy1ei6bLtmc
I did some emergency maintenance and on that occasion I added the
"Mai
+1.
Thank you for taking the time and effort to compile a coherent document.
On Thursday 21 March 2024 at 09:51:40 UTC-7 John H Palmieri wrote:
> Dear Sage community,
>
> As announced at
> https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/Xf6dbPLmKPY/m/p88auKlBAwAJ, I
> propose some changes to the Code
One thing that may deserve a cursory check is the overhead involved in
inheriting from AlgebraicScheme_subscheme_toric class . Some parent
structures are optimized for prolonged use *after* creation and may do a
lot of caching/precomputation. There may be scenarios where one wants to
construct
On Monday 11 March 2024 at 15:04:50 UTC-7 Giacomo Pope wrote:
I chose the weighting (1 : g + 1 : 1) following Galbraith's textbook
https://www.math.auckland.ac.nz/~sgal018/crypto-book/ch10.pdf when
implementing the arithmetic on the Jacobian. This is not a "good" answer
though.
I would love to
The change makes sense, but you should investigate if it is at all possible
to do this going through normal deprecation procedures, which would
probably involve having both functionalities for some time (likely via
differently named methods or via a flag implemented in a backward-compatime
way)
On Wednesday 6 March 2024 at 04:52:16 UTC-8 Giacomo Pope wrote:
I think aside from maybe needing additional methods on the hyperelliptic
curve, once the projective model is right and points on the curve are well
defined for all cases. I do not have any intuition on whether the balanced
model w
1 - 100 of 1540 matches
Mail list logo
