[sage-devel] Re: GSoC 2013 : Sage Android app

Here is my proposal for Android app in Sage. Please look over it and tell me if I have to improve it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mwi0sj6o24dg70S-MIURkkSz7cT47W83TQmySBxs2y0/ -- You received this messa

[sage-devel] Re: GSoC 2013 : Sage Android app

On Tuesday, April 30, 2013 2:52:15 PM UTC+1, Ajay wrote: > What kinds of topics should I be expected to include in this guide? > Anything in Sage is fair game, I'd say. I don't have a ready-made list if thats your question. > Also is there any guideline for showing the interactive calculation

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [GSoC 2013] Questions regarding "Sage Android app"

Sir, Thanks for your help. I will go through these links shared on that post and try to work on building a proposal. If I get any other question during this process, I will definitely get back to this list. Regards On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Volker Braun wrote: > See this post in the sa

[sage-devel] Re: [GSoC 2013] Questions regarding "Sage Android app"

See this post in the sage-gsoc list: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-gsoc/L4KtZEpLork/9VtXcE3DHoUJ On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 7:51:28 PM UTC+1, Bhargav G wrote: > > Hello > > I am Bhargav, a Computer Science undergraduate student from BITS-Pilani, > India. I am an avid mobile app develop

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Tk, the ugly grandpa zombie of the GUI toolkits. That means Motif widgets on X, yay (ok there are other themes, but zero integration into Gnome/KDE). Its not something that I would want to use on the Unix side of the cross-platform system. On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 8:30:38 AM UTC-4, Nathan

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On Sunday, March 10, 2013 1:35:28 PM UTC-5, mmarco wrote: > I am not sure pyGTK (or pyQT, or any other python bindings) is the way > to go. As you said, it would require to install pyGTK, but also GTK > itself and python. I think that is overkill. I haven't used PyGTK, but I do have experience

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Op dinsdag 12 maart 2013 13:18:43 UTC+1 schreef Jesus Torrado het volgende: > > On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 12:52:39 PM UTC+1, Harald Schilly wrote: > If I may, I would suggest to implement, up to some point, symbolic tensor > calculus, e.g. along the lines Mathematica does since v9: > http://www.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Jesus Torrado wrote: > If I may, I would suggest to implement, up to some point, symbolic tensor > calculus hi, yes, i think that's an interesting project. have you seen sympy's tensor module? http://docs.sympy.org/0.7.0/modules/tensor.html It has probably alrea

Re: [sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On Tuesday 12 Mar 2013, Harald Schilly wrote: > On Friday, March 8, 2013 10:43:43 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > > IIRC, the call for projects of Google summer of code was last year > > around march or april. Should we start to get prepared for this? > > Hi, I didn't had time, but I wanted to post some

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 12:52:39 PM UTC+1, Harald Schilly wrote: > > Although students can also submit their own ideas (and they also write > more detailed proposals), we need to come up with a good and organized list > of ideas, which is also suited to attract new contributors. I.e. it > sho

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On Friday, March 8, 2013 10:43:43 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > > IIRC, the call for projects of Google summer of code was last year > around march or april. Should we start to get prepared for this? > Hi, I didn't had time, but I wanted to post something (again) yesterday. I've written the past

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On 2013-03-08, mmarco wrote: > IIRC, the call for projects of Google summer of code was last year > around march or april. Should we start to get prepared for this? > > As a suggestion for possible projects, I'd propose improving the integration of semidefinite programming solvers in Sage, creat

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

In practice, I think you can use either and I never ran into any major obstacles with either. IMHO Qt is the best fit if you want a C++ toolkit, since it is natively written in C++. If you want to use another language then you'll invariably find that the C++ object model is slightly different t

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Just for curiosity: what advantages has pyGTK over pyQt? I have some experience on pyQt, so maybe i could help with that too. On 11 mar, 01:44, Volker Braun wrote: > Shipping the .net / mono runtime adds about the same order of magnitude as > PyGTK, QT+Python bindings, or Java JRE for that matter

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Shipping the .net / mono runtime adds about the same order of magnitude as PyGTK, QT+Python bindings, or Java JRE for that matter. A drop in the bucket compared to the Sage install that it is supposed to manage. And IHMO the question is not how to save a few megabytes of disk space, but how to

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Op zondag 10 maart 2013 19:40:41 UTC+1 schreef mmarco het volgende: > > > > * noncommutative / supercommutative variables in expressions, (say pq - > qp > > = i) > > That is already supported in g-algebras. Look for the documentation of > FreeAlgebra.g_algebra > > That looks great! It would b

Re: [sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Le 10/03/2013 19:35, mmarco a écrit : I am not sure pyGTK (or pyQT, or any other python bindings) is the way to go. As you said, it would require to install pyGTK, but also GTK itself and python. I think that is overkill. I think that a windows native program, or maybe something writen in the .NE

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

>  * noncommutative / supercommutative variables in expressions, (say pq - qp > = i) That is already supported in g-algebras. Look for the documentation of FreeAlgebra.g_algebra -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe fr

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

I am not sure pyGTK (or pyQT, or any other python bindings) is the way to go. As you said, it would require to install pyGTK, but also GTK itself and python. I think that is overkill. I think that a windows native program, or maybe something writen in the .NET framework (making sure that it also wo

Re: [sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Note that Sage already has a wrapper around third-party linear solvers such as GLPK,CBC, Gurobi, CPLEX http://sagemath.org/doc/reference/numerical.html Also, there is a patch adding Constraint Integer Programming through SCIP here: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10879 On Su

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

What about implementing Google's constraint programming library ( https://code.google.com/p/or-tools/)? It can be useful for problems in discrete mathematics, and would give Sage capabilities that it appears that no other mathematical software has. On Friday, 8 March 2013 01:43:43 UTC-8, mmarco

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

Op vrijdag 8 maart 2013 10:43:43 UTC+1 schreef mmarco het volgende: > > IIRC, the call for projects of Google summer of code was last year > around march or april. Should we start to get prepared for this? > > I think you're right that we should. One thing that I would like to have in Sage is be

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

A GUI would be useful, I think. I'd use PyGTK, which gives a nice "native" look on Windows yet is totally platform agnostic. And, being Python, fits nicely into the skillset that we can expect from a Sage developer. The only minor drawback is that you need PyGTK libraries, which is trivial on

Re: [sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On Mar 8, 2013, at 3:27 AM, P Purkayastha wrote: > On 03/08/2013 05:43 PM, mmarco wrote: >> IIRC, the call for projects of Google summer of code was last year >> around march or april. Should we start to get prepared for this? >> >> As a suggestion for possible projects, i would propose the writ

[sage-devel] Re: GSOC 2013

On 03/08/2013 05:43 PM, mmarco wrote: IIRC, the call for projects of Google summer of code was last year around march or april. Should we start to get prepared for this? As a suggestion for possible projects, i would propose the writing of a windows GUI program that handles the virtual machines