On Feb 3, 2:13 am, mabshoff wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2:43 pm, dannychrastina wrote:
>
> > On Jan 14, 4:04 pm, mabshoff wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 13, 10:13 pm, DavidS wrote:
> > > > But further along the compilation, I got stuck here:
> > > > ld -opolybori/libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0.0.0 -shared -Wl,-
> > >
Hi,
> > Hi, I'm having the same error with 3.2.3 (on Gentoo x86_64). It seems
> > to me that this '-Wl,-soname,libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0' is in the form in
> > which options are given to the compiler in order to pass to the
> > linker, but since this is running the linker directly it should just
> >
On Feb 3, 12:34 am, dannychrastina wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2:13 am, mabshoff wrote:
> > * What binutils release are you running (i.e. ld --version)
>
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.18.
>
> I notice David (above) had the same problem using 2.19. Also, just for
> completeness,
I *very* much doubt tha
On Feb 3, 12:36 am, Alexander Dreyer
wrote:
Hi Alexander,
> Hi,> > Hi, I'm having the same error with 3.2.3 (on Gentoo x86_64). It seems
> > > to me that this '-Wl,-soname,libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0' is in the form in
> > > which options are given to the compiler in order to pass to the
> > > lin
> Ok, that is a side effect of not setting -fno-common. I am curious
> which gcc release this is.
powerpc-apple-darwin8-gcc-4.0.1
>
>export SHAREDFLAGS="-fno-common"
>
> and restart the build.
Okay, I will try that. Apparently it is picking up where it left off
and separately doing each o
I agree, some consistent syntax for multiple integrals is needed.
For example, to me this seems strange:
sage: x,y = var("x,y")
sage: f = y*sin(x*y)
sage: bool(diff(f,x,y) == diff(diff(f,x),y))
True
sage: bool(integral(f,x,y) == integral(integral(f,x),y))
False
At least, it is a possible source
On Feb 3, 9:36 am, Alexander Dreyer
wrote:
> > > Hi, I'm having the same error with 3.2.3 (on Gentoo x86_64). It seems
> > > to me that this '-Wl,-soname,libpolybori-0.5.0.so.0' is in the form in
> > > which options are given to the compiler in order to pass to the
> > > linker, but since this is
Sorry for replying to my own post, as I should have checked this sooner:
sage: import sympy
sage: sympy.integrate(f,x,y) == sympy.integrate(sympy.integrate(f,x),y)
True
sage: sympy.diff(f,x,y) == sympy.diff(sympy.diff(f,x),y)
True
So Sympy is consistent in terms of the diff/integrate syntax. How
On Feb 3, 4:53 am, dannychrastina wrote:
Hi,
> Ok, so I extracted the .spkg of polybori (having worked out that it
> was just a bzipped tarball), changed SConstruct (with sonameprefix as
> '-Wl,-soname -Wl,'), and repackaged it, and it didn't work:
>
> ld -o polybori/libpolybori-0.5.1.so.0.
>
> Well, I am much more interested in gcc -v since the above can cover 3
> or so XCode releases.
Build 5370.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr..
On Feb 3, 3:54 am, kcrisman wrote:
> > Ok, that is a side effect of not setting -fno-common. I am curious
> > which gcc release this is.
>
> powerpc-apple-darwin8-gcc-4.0.1
Well, I am much more interested in gcc -v since the above can cover 3
or so XCode releases.
>
>
> > export SHAREDFLAG
On Feb 3, 8:53 am, kcrisman wrote:
> > Well, I am much more interested in gcc -v since the above can cover 3
> > or so XCode releases.
>
> Build 5370.
Thanks.
I ran testlong on that OSX 10.4/PPC and I am seeing one surprising
doctest failure
sage -t -long "devel/sage/sage/symbolic/fu
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:22 AM, David Joyner wrote:
>
> Sorry for replying to my own post, as I should have checked this sooner:
>
> sage: import sympy
> sage: sympy.integrate(f,x,y) == sympy.integrate(sympy.integrate(f,x),y)
> True
> sage: sympy.diff(f,x,y) == sympy.diff(sympy.diff(f,x),y)
> Tru
kcrisman wrote:
> Dear Devel list,
>
> Before reading this, read the discussions at
> http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/8ec32e4d895da60c
> and tracs # 1221 and # 2787.
>
> Since nothing has been done on this in over a year, and because I feel
> fairly strongly that i
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Fredrik Johansson
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:22 PM, David Joyner wrote:
>> So Sympy is consistent in terms of the diff/integrate syntax. However,
>> For plot and integrate, the syntax is slightly different:
>>
>> sage: sympy.integrate( f, [x, 0, pi], [y,
There is quite a bit of discussion going on at ticket
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4890 about nauty's interactive
installation that demands that a user agree to a license. I originally
made that spkg and the result of the discussion at that time was that an
interactive license wa
On Feb 2, 9:16 pm, kcrisman wrote:
> sage: integrate(sin(x),[x],[var('y')]) # double integral, x first
> sage: integrate(sin(x),[x,0,pi],[y]) # one definite, one indefinite
> sage: integrate(sin(x),(x,),(x,)) # double integral, using tuples
> instead of lists if you like parentheses
> sage: inte
On Feb 3, 1:27 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
> There is quite a bit of discussion going on at
> tickethttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4890about nauty's interactive
> installation that demands that a user agree to a license. I originally
> made that spkg and the result of the discussion at
I definitely think that a passive approach is better. Debian, for example,
has their repositories split into "free" and "non-free". I believe that
this would be the best solution to this problem.
Click-through interactive licensing agreements are no stronger than passive
licenses. The law is th
For the bean-counters, that's a -1 to interactive crap.
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Tom Boothby wrote:
> I definitely think that a passive approach is better. Debian, for example,
> has their repositories split into "free" and "non-free". I believe that
> this would be the best solution to
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> There is quite a bit of discussion going on at ticket
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4890 about nauty's interactive
> installation that demands that a user agree to a license. I originally
> made that spkg and the result of the
Ok, thanks to Ivan who did upload some patches to trac 3.3.alpha5 out
in a couple hours will create a Sage app if you run -bdist. Check out
a screenshot of it in action at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/mabshoff/SageApp.png
It is based on Sage 3.3.alpha0 since I did no feel like hosing
William Stein wrote:
> PROPOSAL 1: When installing official Sage spkg's, Sage should not
> interactively ask the user to agree to licenses.
>
> Justification: (1) My understanding is that interactive license
> agreements are no more legally binding than non-interactive ones. (2)
> Debian/Ubuntu
On Feb 3, 2:15 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
> > Does someone (William?, mabshoff?) want to explicitly state the proposal
> > we are voting on?
>
> PROPOSAL 1: When installing official Sage spkg's, Sage should not
> interactively ask the us
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:22 PM, David Joyner wrote:
> So Sympy is consistent in terms of the diff/integrate syntax. However,
> For plot and integrate, the syntax is slightly different:
>
> sage: sympy.integrate( f, [x, 0, pi], [y, 0, pi])
> pi - 1/pi*sin(pi**2)
> sage: sympy.Plot( f, [x, 0, pi, n
Robert Dodier wrote:
> On Feb 2, 9:16 pm, kcrisman wrote:
>
>> sage: integrate(sin(x),[x],[var('y')]) # double integral, x first
>> sage: integrate(sin(x),[x,0,pi],[y]) # one definite, one indefinite
>> sage: integrate(sin(x),(x,),(x,)) # double integral, using tuples
>> instead of lists if you
On Feb 3, 2:09 pm, Tom Boothby wrote:
> I definitely think that a passive approach is better. Debian, for example,
> has their repositories split into "free" and "non-free". I believe that
> this would be the best solution to this problem.
>
> Click-through interactive licensing agreements ar
On Feb 3, 9:33 am, mabshoff wrote:
> On Feb 3, 8:53 am, kcrisman wrote:
>
> > > Well, I am much more interested in gcc -v since the above can cover 3
> > > or so XCode releases.
>
> > Build 5370.
>
> Thanks.
>
> I ran testlong on that OSX 10.4/PPC and I am seeing one surprising
> doctest failu
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:19 AM, wrote:
> William,
>
> Could you (or Mike) review #5141 and #5143? #5141 is a one-line fix to make
> sure that tinymce is disabled on published worksheets, while #5143
> implements William's feature request of shift-enter submitting a tinyMCE
> form. I also put
On Feb 3, 5:36 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:19 AM, wrote:
> > William,
>
> > Could you (or Mike) review #5141 and #5143? #5141 is a one-line fix to make
> > sure that tinymce is disabled on published worksheets, while #5143
> > implements William's feature request of
William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:19 AM, wrote:
>> William,
>>
>> Could you (or Mike) review #5141 and #5143? #5141 is a one-line fix to make
>> sure that tinymce is disabled on published worksheets, while #5143
>> implements William's feature request of shift-enter submitting a
> So thanks to Karl-Dieter and Ivan for finally makeing this a reality
> since we have been talking about this since ye old Sage 2.5 at least
> when I posted some crummy manually assembled app.
You're welcome, and thanks to Ivan as well, as this seems to be nicer
than anything I could cook up. I
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> William Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:19 AM, wrote:
>>> William,
>>>
>>> Could you (or Mike) review #5141 and #5143? #5141 is a one-line fix to make
>>> sure that tinymce is disabled on published worksheets, while #5143
>>> imp
Wow, that was definitely not the direction I was anticipating this to
take...
Robert's contribution is very interesting, though I'm not sure how
indefinite integrals (without "+C") fit into that framework.
As to the issue on the tracs, my view is that an indefinite integral
is not a function in
Hello,
I just wanted to point out Tim Gowers' Polymath, an experiment in
"massively collaborative mathematics" currently underway on his blog:
http://gowers.wordpress.com/
It seems the basic idea is that in an appropriate public setting,
mathematicians (or anyone else) may be able to organize
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Pat LeSmithe wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I just wanted to point out Tim Gowers' Polymath, an experiment in
> "massively collaborative mathematics" currently underway on his blog:
>
> http://gowers.wordpress.com/
>
> It seems the basic idea is that in an appropriate pub
On Feb 3, 2009, at 7:19 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>> So thanks to Karl-Dieter and Ivan for finally makeing this a reality
>> since we have been talking about this since ye old Sage 2.5 at least
>> when I posted some crummy manually assembled app.
>
> You're welcome, and thanks to Ivan as well, as this
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Ivan Andrus wrote:
>
> On Feb 3, 2009, at 7:19 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>>> So thanks to Karl-Dieter and Ivan for finally makeing this a reality
>>> since we have been talking about this since ye old Sage 2.5 at least
>>> when I posted some crummy manually assembled a
On Feb 3, 7:07 pm, William Stein wrote:
> > It was the only icon I could find in the (admittedly short) time I
> > looked. Where could I get the icon (as large as possible)? Also, if
> > you can tell me what to do with dropped files I could easily add
> > that. i.e. how does one open a .s
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 7:12 PM, mabshoff wrote:
>
>
>
> On Feb 3, 7:07 pm, William Stein wrote:
>
>
>
>> > It was the only icon I could find in the (admittedly short) time I
>> > looked. Where could I get the icon (as large as possible)? Also, if
>> > you can tell me what to do with dropped f
On Feb 3, 7:16 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 7:12 PM, mabshoff wrote:
> >> would start a notebook server if it isn't already running, and once it
> >> is, would call basically (1) above for the default sage notebook
> >> server running from $DOT_SAGE/sage_notebook.
>
> > I
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:15 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> "Since we have a fundamental disagreement here, this will need to be
>> discussed on sage-devel and possibly voted on."
>>
>>
The reasoning below applies not just to "pick
> It was the only icon I could find in the (admittedly short) time I
> looked. Where could I get the icon (as large as possible)?
I pulled it either off of sagemath.org, or from Picture2.png from the
front page of this google group. It's not particularly big,
unfortunately.
- kcrisman
--~--
And the hope is that now one could much
> >> more easily make incremental improvements to this skeleton in order to
> >> support e.g. dropping .sws or .sage files on it.
> Hmm... there might actually be no way to do that.
What about .sage files? My understanding is that OSX apps would
support
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 at 06:19PM -0800, kcrisman wrote:
> You're welcome, and thanks to Ivan as well, as this seems to be nicer
> than anything I could cook up. I have to say that I prefer the
> icosahedron icon, though :)
I happen to prefer the orange perspective-cube. Just sayin'...
> And the ho
Almost two years ago, Linbox's implementation of Smith normal form was
taken out of Sage because it was too buggy. After some work, I managed
to reinstate it, hoping that the bugs might have been fixed. Here's a
partial status report:
1. I haven't tested it very broadly, but it seems to work on
46 matches
Mail list logo
