On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:22 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Dag Sverre
> Seljebotn wrote:
>>
>> William Stein wrote:
>>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
>>> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
>>> (e.g., Ma
On Jul 1, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> William Stein wrote:
>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
>> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
>> (e.g., Magma, Maple, Mathematica) rather than the numerical side, at
>> least
So, here's the thing... and this is entirely IMHO (some may question
whether the "H" applies :-) There's been some off-and-on sidebar
chatter on this subject for a while and this thread seems a place to
insert it publicly.
Sage has a HUGE amount of functionality built in that is very useful
to t
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>> Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
> 2009/7/2 Stéfan van der Walt :
>> 2009/7/1 William Stein :
>>> Per
Ondrej Certik wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> Ondrej Certik wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
2009/7/2 Stéfan van der Walt :
> 2009/7/1 William Stein :
>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>> 2009/7/2 Stéfan van der Walt :
2009/7/1 William Stein :
> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
> focus in Sage more on
Ondrej Certik wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> 2009/7/2 Stéfan van der Walt :
>>> 2009/7/1 William Stein :
Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
(e.g., Magma
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:33 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> 2009/7/2 Stéfan van der Walt :
>>
>> 2009/7/1 William Stein :
>>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
>>> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
>>> (e.g., Magma, Maple, Mathematica) r
2009/7/2 Stéfan van der Walt :
>
> 2009/7/1 William Stein :
>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
>> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
>> (e.g., Magma, Maple, Mathematica) rather than the numerical side, at
>> least for the time being.
2009/7/1 William Stein :
> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
> (e.g., Magma, Maple, Mathematica) rather than the numerical side, at
> least for the time being. I don't have a problem with that
>
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:20 PM, William Stein wrote:
> [...]
>> Anyway, +1 to their being a BSD'd build system. Most code in Sage
>> is GPL'd because either (1) it is derived from code GPL'd a decade
>> ago, or (2) we'll get ripped off b
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:20 PM, William Stein wrote:
[...]
> Anyway, +1 to their being a BSD'd build system. Most code in Sage
> is GPL'd because either (1) it is derived from code GPL'd a decade
> ago, or (2) we'll get ripped off by the Ma's. The build system
> doesn't fall into either cate
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Dag Sverre
Seljebotn wrote:
>
> William Stein wrote:
>> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
>> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
>> (e.g., Magma, Maple, Mathematica) rather than the numerical side, at
>>
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>>>
>>> Howdy,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:57 AM, William Stein wrote:
I have to add that not only is Sage very low o
William Stein wrote:
> Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I'm taking this as a message to
> focus in Sage more on the algebraic/symbolic side of mathematics
> (e.g., Magma, Maple, Mathematica) rather than the numerical side, at
> least for the time being.I don't have a problem with that
> pers
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:57 AM, William Stein wrote:
>>> I have to add that not only is Sage very low on the above list, Sage
>>> got the *most* "no" votes from the 30
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Kevin Horton wrote:
>
> William Stein wrote:
>>
>> The best conclusion I can draw from all this is that for now at least
>> I'm going to focus on symbolic/algebraic computation, and let
>> Enthought continue to do a great job building the Python numerical
>> stack.
William Stein wrote:
>
> The best conclusion I can draw from all this is that for now at least
> I'm going to focus on symbolic/algebraic computation, and let
> Enthought continue to do a great job building the Python numerical
> stack.
I think that the survey results are at least in part a reflec
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
> Howdy,
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:57 AM, William Stein wrote:
>> I have to add that not only is Sage very low on the above list, Sage
>> got the *most* "no" votes from the 30 people who actually voted (tying
>> only with Networkx), accord
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> I sort of doubt that most people would make their decisions on what
> tools to learn based on licenses, or at least I hope that's the case.
To be precise: amongst open source tools. I do use licenses as a
criterion: if choosing between a p
Howdy,
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:57 AM, William Stein wrote:
> I have to add that not only is Sage very low on the above list, Sage
> got the *most* "no" votes from the 30 people who actually voted (tying
> only with Networkx), according to the table here:
>
> http://fdoperez.blogspot.com/2009/
William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
The time for the Scipy'09 conference is rapidly approaching, and we
would like to b
Note that there was already a Python+Sage talk at a recent SIAM conference
http://fdoperez.blogspot.com/2008/07/python-tools-for-science-go-to-siam.html
http://www.ams.org/ams/siam-2008.html#python
which was apparently very popular. It may be that those who attended the SIAM
conference and who are
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Harald Schilly wrote:
>
> On Jul 1, 12:57 pm, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> http://fdoperez.blogspot.com/2009/06/scipy-advanced-tutorials-results...
>>
>> I don't know if I should interpret this as:
>
> my interpretation is, that people simply want to learn more ab
On Jul 1, 12:57 pm, William Stein wrote:
>
> http://fdoperez.blogspot.com/2009/06/scipy-advanced-tutorials-results...
>
> I don't know if I should interpret this as:
my interpretation is, that people simply want to learn more about
those tools which they already know about. sage isn't part of
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>>> The time for the Scipy'09 conference is rapidly approaching, and we
>>> would like to both announce the plan for
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
>> The time for the Scipy'09 conference is rapidly approaching, and we
>> would like to both announce the plan for tutorials and solicit
>> feedback from everyone on topics of i
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> The time for the Scipy'09 conference is rapidly approaching, and we
> would like to both announce the plan for tutorials and solicit
> feedback from everyone on topics of interest.
rather than rehash much here, where it's not easy to p
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> Fernando Perez wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In order to proceed with contacting speakers, we'd now like to get
>> some feedback from you. This Doodle poll should take no more than a
>
>
> Does "you" mean "people attending scipy09", or does it mea
Fernando Perez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In order to proceed with contacting speakers, we'd now like to get
> some feedback from you. This Doodle poll should take no more than a
Does "you" mean "people attending scipy09", or does it mean "sage
developers, whether or not you are attending scipy09"?
Hi all,
In order to proceed with contacting speakers, we'd now like to get
some feedback from you. This Doodle poll should take no more than a
couple of minutes to fill out (no password or registration required):
http://doodle.com/hb5bea6fivm3b5bk
So please let us know which topics you are mos
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Fernando Perez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The time for the Scipy'09 conference is rapidly approaching, and we
> would like to both announce the plan for tutorials and solicit
> feedback from everyone on topics of interest.
I hope the above isn't considered too off-topi
32 matches
Mail list logo
