On Nov 3, 12:46 am, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 02 November 2007 15:38, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > > The patch applied against rc1 passes with flying colors. You need to use
> > > the second bundle on the ticket since the first bundle is already in (but
> > > backed out).
On Friday 02 November 2007 15:38, mabshoff wrote:
> > The patch applied against rc1 passes with flying colors. You need to use
> > the second bundle on the ticket since the first bundle is already in (but
> > backed out). Maybe there is a correct way to back out the back out, but
> > I don't kno
On Nov 2, 7:39 pm, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 02 November 2007 10:45, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > On Nov 2, 12:45 pm, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Everything is possible, but I am fairly sure that the behavior of the
> > doctests only changes if the patc
William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 09:24:53 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I guess I just don't think permutation (which are functions) should
>>> act on the left. It's repulsive to me.I guess there's just
>>> not much more to say than that.
>> Ok. I don't think that's a very
On Friday 02 November 2007 10:45, mabshoff wrote:
> On Nov 2, 12:45 pm, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Everything is possible, but I am fairly sure that the behavior of the
> doctests only changes if the patch made it in. Can you check that your
> patch applied against rc1 passes do
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 09:24:53 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I guess I just don't think permutation (which are functions) should
>> act on the left. It's repulsive to me.I guess there's just
>> not much more to say than that.
>
> Ok. I don't think that's a very good attitude to enforce,
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:08:40 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, William Stein wrote:
>>> On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Under the way I've implemented this, the
action on the list [1,...,n] is trivially
isomorphic
On Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 07:45:34AM -0700, mabshoff wrote:
> > mabshoff: Are you sure you ran doc-tests with the *patched* version of
> > sage?
> > Because that doc-test wasn't even in the vanilla version.
> >
>
> Everything is possible, but I am fairly sure that the behavior of the
> doctests o
> Now we are getting somewhere, maybe. I'm thinking of the
> natural (to me!) right action and you're thinking
> of the left action got by inverting the permutation and acting
> in the natural way :-).
>
> I guess I just don't think permutation (which are functions) should
> act on the left. It'
On Nov 2, 12:45 pm, "Joel B. Mohler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 02 November 2007 00:17, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > #1032: Latex'ing variable names is more robust and consistent (Joel
> > Mohler) - this one was actually backed out again - see the ticket for
> > comment
>
> It's possible th
A short outlook:
People on OpenSuSE 10.2 should know the following:
[09:33] Hmph. I cannot get yast to tell me what the g77-
package is named. *grmbl*
[09:33] Which SuSE release?
[09:34] You should probably install gfortran
[09:34] 10.3 no longer ships g77 or g95, but gfortran.
[09:34] Open
It looks to me as though there are some crossed wires here. The
permutation is acting on *any* list of length 5 by permuting the
indices of the elements (taken as 1..5 rather than python-standard
0..4 but still). In the example you are using the entries in the
list happen to also be the numbers
On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 00:08:40 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, William Stein wrote:
>> On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Under the way I've implemented this, the
>>> action on the list [1,...,n] is trivially
>>> isomorphic to the group structure. You
>>> seem to be using a l
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, William Stein wrote:
>
> On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> Under the way I've implemented this, the
>> action on the list [1,...,n] is trivially
>> isomorphic to the group structure. You
>> seem to be using a left-action which
> ^^^
>
> I am us
On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Under the way I've implemented this, the
> action on the list [1,...,n] is trivially
> isomorphic to the group structure. You
> seem to be using a left-action which
^^^
I am using a left action.
> doesn't really go well with the nota
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, William Stein wrote:
> Applying the permutation (1,2,3)(4,5) to [0,1,2,3,4]
> should either move the entry in position 1 (which happens
> to be called "0") to position 2, so that the output looks like
> [*,0,*,*,*]
> or if we do some weird 1-based thing, it would always
>
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, William Stein wrote:
>
> On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> In particular, how does applying (1,2,3)(4,5) to [0,1,2,3,4]
>>> result in what you claim, i.e., in [1, 2, 0, 4, 3]?
>>> It should either be an error, or maybe:
>>>[2,0,1,3,4]
>>> if s
On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In particular, how does applying (1,2,3)(4,5) to [0,1,2,3,4]
> > result in what you claim, i.e., in [1, 2, 0, 4, 3]?
> > It should either be an error, or maybe:
> >[2,0,1,3,4]
> > if say (1,2,3)(4,5) sends the "first entry", i.e., 0t
> In particular, how does applying (1,2,3)(4,5) to [0,1,2,3,4]
> result in what you claim, i.e., in [1, 2, 0, 4, 3]?
> It should either be an error, or maybe:
>[2,0,1,3,4]
> if say (1,2,3)(4,5) sends the "first entry", i.e., 0th position
> to the 1st, the 1st to 2nd, etc,
That's what is going
On 11/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The expected output is incorrect; the actual output is correct.
From irc:
20:24 < mabshoff> Sucks, but also re #750:
20:24 < mabshoff> File "permgroup_element.py", line 323:
20:24 < mabshoff> sage: g([0,1,2,3,4])
20:24 < mabshoff>
On Nov 2, 5:29 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello boothby,
> The expected output is incorrect; the actual output is correct.
Okay, I am fixing the doctest then.
We are planning an rc2 in a couple hours if William and I get it to
compile on 10.5 without the need for manual interaction. We are
The expected output is incorrect; the actual output is correct.
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, mabshoff wrote:
>
> I have released 2.8.11.rc1 (sorry, I skipped rc0, by the time I
> realized the problem I had already called it rc1 in trac) at
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/sage-2.8.11.rc
22 matches
Mail list logo
