On Nov 15, 2007 1:45 AM, Dan Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I discovered Sage recently and am very excited about it. In grad school,
> I came to be very good with Mathematica, and am now doing a postdoc
> where I only have access to (an old copy of) Maple. I like the idea of
> having my math
On Nov 15, 2007 7:49 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > f := x -> integrate(exp(t^2), t=0..x); (Maple)
> > evalf(f(2));
...
>
> You can define that function and compute the integral in Sage as
> follows:
>
> sage: assume(x > 0)
> sage: f(x,t) = integrate(exp(t^2), t, 0, x
On Nov 15, 2007 2:49 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 15, 2007 1:45 AM, Dan Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I discovered Sage recently and am very excited about it. In grad school,
> > I came to be very good with Mathematica, and am now doing a postdoc
> > where I o
On Nov 15, 2007 8:49 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, Sage does not have an implementation of computing
> a numerical approximation of erf(a) when a is not real, as PARI only
> provides this function in case a is real, and maxima also seems to
> only provide it in that
Hello,
the disc subsystem seems slow on sage.math and behold:
28099 messageb 25 0 2640 400 312 R 100 0.0 7656:04 klogd
i.e. klogd is going nuts using 100% CPU on one core. Can somebody with
appropriate rights investigate this? klogd has been started "-P" which
I do not know and isn't
Klas Heggemann wrote:
>
> On 15 nov 2007, at 16.45, Michael Abshoff wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> However the build does not seem to be functional:
>>>
>>> sgray:sage-2.8.12>./sage
>>> --
>>> | SAGE Version 2.8.12, Release Date:
>>> 2007-11-
Hi,
I would like to discuss how to improve calculus in SAGE.
I know, that currently, most of the developers need other things more
urgently, but I think calculus will be the most frequently used part
in SAGE. For example all my friends and colleagues cannot really use
SAGE at the moment, because
On Nov 15, 5:39 pm, "Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to discuss how to improve calculus in SAGE.
>
> I know, that currently, most of the developers need other things more
> urgently, but I think calculus will be the most frequently used part
> in SAGE. For exampl
I posted a link on the trac ticket, to a reasonably precise implementation in
C. It's built to work in Octave, but it would be rather simple to adapt it to,
for example, GSL complex numbers.
On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
>
> On Nov 15, 2007 8:49 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROT
Who are the main people who are responsible for SAGE marketing? I
will have some free time in December and I would like to devote some
of it to helping with SAGE's marketing effort.
Ted
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googleg
On Nov 16, 3:05 am, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The code for residue field is currently not correct. In converting a number
> field element, it expresses it in terms of a power basis for the number
> field and then casts the coefficients to Z/pZ. But the coefficients can
> have de
Hello,
I would like to propose that the next Bug Day is held on Sat. Nov.
24th. 2007. That is the day before the planned 2.9 release. Since we
want to have a point release as a basis for the Bug Day we might have
to shift the releases around a little or alternatively this time work
of a 2.9pre sn
The code for residue field is currently not correct. In converting a number
field element, it expresses it in terms of a power basis for the number
field and then casts the coefficients to Z/pZ. But the coefficients can
have denominators divisible by p in general. That's probably what's causing
Hi folks,
I run into some coercion trouble when I reduce a fourier coefficient
of a cusp form modulo a prime ideal. (See below.)
Any idea how I can avoid this?
Regards,
Ifti
===
sage: M = ModularSymbols(77, 2)
sage: s = M.cuspidal_subspace().new_subspace()
sage: N = s.decomposition()
sage:
On Nov 16, 1:30 am, Iftikhar Burhanuddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi folks,
Hello Ifti,
>
> I run into some coercion trouble when I reduce a fourier coefficient
> of a cusp form modulo a prime ideal. (See below.)
>
> Any idea how I can avoid this?
>
No clue for now, but that looks like a
On Nov 16, 3:43 am, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi David,
> I lost internet connection and then lost the traceback when my machine
> restarted, so if you could open a ticket on the __rpath issue, I would
> apprectiate it.
>
> The residue field problem is ticket 1183.
> David
Yep, n
mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> But back to your question: We should have somebody or a group of
> people who are working on Marketing, at least the non-hyperbole driven
> kind. One thing I can think are consistent a correctly spelled release
> announcements, so if you could come up with some suggestio
I lost internet connection and then lost the traceback when my machine
restarted, so if you could open a ticket on the __rpath issue, I would
apprectiate it.
The residue field problem is ticket 1183.
David
On Nov 15, 2007 9:29 PM, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I lost internet connection
Klas Heggemann wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
>>
Hi Klas,
>> mmh, I remember fixing that. Maybe it snuck back in or Bill has fixed
>> it upstream only.
I will open a ticket for this in a minute or two so it doesn't get lost.
>>
>> Either way I will check this out on my Sun 10 box. Last time I checke
I suspect this is just an oversight in the R.number_field() method --
for instance, the following causes trouble:
sage: A. = QQ[]
sage: R = A.quotient_ring(x^2+x+1)
sage: K = R.number_field()
sage: K
Number Field in xbar with defining polynomial x^2 + x + 1
sage: x.parent()
Univariate Polyn
On Nov 15, 9:18 pm, "Ted Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Who are the main people who are responsible for SAGE marketing? I
> will have some free time in December and I would like to devote some
> of it to helping with SAGE's marketing effort.
>
> Ted
Hi Ted,
I don't think there is a forma
On 15-Nov-07, at 6:32 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to propose that the next Bug Day is held on Sat. Nov.
> 24th. 2007. That is the day before the planned 2.9 release. Since we
> want to have a point release as a basis for the Bug Day we might have
> to shift the releases aroun
scipy has an error function that takes complex arguments
sage: import numpy, scipy
sage: from scipy import special
sage: j=numpy.complex(0,1)
sage: -j*float(sqrt(pi))*special.erf(2*j)/2
(16.45262776550727+0j)
Unfortunately numpy and sage's complex numbers are not compatible yet.
On Nov 15, 1
23 matches
Mail list logo
