Hello folks,
nearly all binaries for 3.4.1 are available in http://www.sagemath.org/bin/
(as the title says). All x86 and x86-64 Linux binary as well as the
VMWare image are now SSE2 only, i.e. there are some performance
regressions as mentioned yesterday in a thread here, for example RDF
matrix
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 06:24:38PM -0700, mabshoff wrote:
> while there should be a quick 3.4.2 to mop up patches from trac before
> the big 4.0 jump today we had a planning session during the UW status
> meeting about the goals for Sage 4.0. The result is at
>
>http://wiki.sagemath.org/plan/
>
> Translation, if it's not clear. It got a coercion map f, tried to
> call f(x), and f(x) returned None which is clearly a bug for whoever
> implemented the morphism in question.
>
That helped me track it down to
{{{
sage: X = Spec(ZZ)
sage: H = Homset(X, X)
sage: H(X.identity_morphism())
}}}
On Apr 25, 2009, at 12:40 AM, Alex Ghitza wrote:
>
>>
>> Translation, if it's not clear. It got a coercion map f, tried to
>> call f(x), and f(x) returned None which is clearly a bug for whoever
>> implemented the morphism in question.
>>
>
> That helped me track it down to
>
> {{{
> sage: X = Spe
Hi All,
Is there anyone who has knowledge about it and its possible future
benefits to scientific computing (especially for sage + maxima etc.)
of the GPU computing with the new Nvidia Tesla platform?
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla_computing_solutions.html
Quote:
"Powered by the Tesla C1060
On Apr 25, 2:15 am, ahmet alper parker wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Is there anyone who has knowledge about it and its possible future
> benefits to scientific computing (especially for sage + maxima etc.)
> of the GPU computing with the new Nvidia Tesla platform?
>
> http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla
On Apr 25, 12:13 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 06:24:38PM -0700, mabshoff wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
> I really would want to get the category code in Sage soon (4.0???):
At this stage I do believe you might have a hard time getting this
into 4.0 given the time frame and
3. as I mentioned, I looked in rings/morphism.pyx for inspiration;
this helped, but not enough so I tried
sage: f = ZZ.hom(QQ)
sage: g = loads(dumps(f))
sage: f == g
False
Shouldn't this return True?
>>
>> Yes
>>
Shouldn't a test like this be somewher
Wow! I have stunning news (for me anyway):
This compiles perfectly *and passes all tests* on ubuntu 64bit 8.10
with a phenom chip.
This is the first time that has happened in more releases than I can remember!
Great job to everyone involed, which definitely includes Michael
Abshoff.
On Fri, A
> How could you not notice? If I do is_Integer I get a big DeprecationWarning:
> Does your Sage not do that?
The reason I did not notice it is that is_Integer() was in the body of
a main loop and no warnings were printed.
For example,
[n for n in range(0,10) if is_Integer(n+1)]
returns
[0,
> How could you not notice? If I do is_Integer I get a big DeprecationWarning:
> Does your Sage not do that?
The reason I did not notice it is that is_Integer() was in the body of
a main loop and no warnings were printed.
For example,
[n for n in range(0,10) if is_Integer(n+1)]
returns
[0,
> At this stage I do believe you might have a hard time getting this
> into 4.0 given the time frame and the ToDo list, but we will see what
> happens :)
I let you pickup the best option.
> Aren't there major design issues like dynamic classes to be
> discussed first? You mentioned a design docu
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery
wrote:
>
>> At this stage I do believe you might have a hard time getting this
>> into 4.0 given the time frame and the ToDo list, but we will see what
>> happens :)
>
> I let you pickup the best option.
>
>> Aren't there major design issues like
> [n for n in range(0,10) if is_Integer(n+1)]
snip
> [n for n in range(0,10) if is_Integer(n)]
You are doing this from the command line, yes? The first is getting
preparsed, so that 1 is not a python int, it is a sage Integer:
sage: preparse('[n for n in range(0,10) if is_Integer(n+1)]')
'[
Hi,
I'm having trouble with building gmp-mpir in sage 3.4.1 on my Mac Pro. I
have previously successfully built 3.1.2 without any difficulty. Any
comments are appreciated. Thanks,
-Jon
=)
---
The Hardware overview is
Model N
> snip
>
> > [n for n in range(0,10) if is_Integer(n)]
>
> You are doing this from the command line, yes?
I am doing this in the notebook()
-Nirmal
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this g
Hi:
I just started preparing for a talk next Friday in an
NSF workshop on "Future Directions of Computaton
Research" in the "Symbolic Software Design" section. Therefore,
I think I should say something about the work on pynac
and how it will be replacing maxima. I tried the wiki to
see what was t
On Apr 25, 10:04 am, Jonathan Hanke wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm having trouble with building gmp-mpir in sage 3.4.1 on my Mac Pro. I
> have previously successfully built 3.1.2 without any difficulty. Any
> comments are appreciated. Thanks,
>
> -Jon
> =)
Hi Jon,
The issue is known and has been fi
This summer Danilo Freitas got accepted to work on better C++ support
for Cython as a GSoC project. This is a great opportunity to make it
easier to wrap and use C++ code from Python. We are still in the
planning stages, and I want to get input from those who've used both:
what do you want
Hello,
I was wondering why boehm_gc is a standard Sage package. It seems that it
isn't actually a dependency of anything in spkg/standard/deps; is that
because it is only used by the sage library and a there's a missing
dependency, or is something else going on?
-Tim Abbott
--~--~--
On Apr 24, 2009, at 03:07 , mabshoff wrote:
> here goes 3.4.2.alpha0. It does not contain all the fixes I wanted,
> but I merged two large (200kb+) patches (#5610 and #5848) that touched
> a lot of files and that were in danger of bitrotting. Since I
> considered it pointless to force people to
Sweet, I will give it a shot.
One last thing I noticed is that attached_files() is not exposed to
the user. Again not sure if this is how its supposed to work or an
actual bug. But if one can attach without refering to a library it
would make sense to see what is currently attached again without
On Apr 25, 2:44 pm, Tim Abbott wrote:
> Hello,
Hi Tim,
> I was wondering why boehm_gc is a standard Sage package. It seems that it
> isn't actually a dependency of anything in spkg/standard/deps; is that
> because it is only used by the sage library and a there's a missing
> dependency, or i
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009, mabshoff wrote:
> boehm_gc is required by ecl - at least the way we will build ecl since
> the default tarball of ecl ships with outdated copies of gmp and
> boehm_gc. The switch from clisp to ecl has been long delayed, but it
> ought to be in 4.0 since clisp 2.47 still does
On Apr 25, 5:53 am, David Joyner wrote:
Hi David,
> Wow! I have stunning news (for me anyway):
>
> This compiles perfectly *and passes all tests* on ubuntu 64bit 8.10
> with a phenom chip.
Well, give the trouble you have seen in the past with your specific
setup this clearly indicates clisp si
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Rado wrote:
>
> Sweet, I will give it a shot.
>
> One last thing I noticed is that attached_files() is not exposed to
> the user. Again not sure if this is how its supposed to work or an
> actual bug. But if one can attach without refering to a library it
> would
Hi folks,
The release tour for Sage 3.4.1 is pretty much done now. You can find it at
http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-3.4.1
Just in case I've forgotten to showcase new features you've introduced
in Sage 3.4.1, this is a friendly reminder for you to alert me to them
or for you to do it yourself. T
Just wanted to thank you for the awesome job you've done on the
release tour. It's really impressive work. I personally find it very
useful.
Bill.
On 26 Apr, 02:48, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> The release tour for Sage 3.4.1 is pretty much done now. You can find it at
>
> http://wiki.sag
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Bill Hart wrote:
>
> Just wanted to thank you for the awesome job you've done on the
> release tour. It's really impressive work. I personally find it very
> useful.
Looking at how much got added just in sage-3.4.1 is totally mind boggling (!).
-- William
>
>
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM, David Joyner wrote:
>
> Hi:
>
> I just started preparing for a talk next Friday in an
> NSF workshop on "Future Directions of Computaton
> Research" in the "Symbolic Software Design" section. Therefore,
How long is your talk? Is it at NSF (so maybe a 10-minute
Builds from scratch fine on OSX.4 on PPC G4. I do have a couple
random things which came out of it, but I assume these are known -
just in case, I post them:
1. I get this error message during the Sphinx run:
docstring of
sage.schemes.elliptic_curves.ell_rational_field.EllipticCurve_rational_fi
On Apr 25, 7:30 pm, kcrisman wrote:
Hi,
> Builds from scratch fine on OSX.4 on PPC G4. I do have a couple
> random things which came out of it, but I assume these are known -
> just in case, I post them:
>
> 1. I get this error message during the Sphinx run:
>
> docstring of
> sage.schemes.e
32 matches
Mail list logo
