> However, it is super slow, because my Cython is very bad. The image
> at #11837 took a few minutes to produce on my reasonably new laptop.
> That's not even close to good enough.
I think replacing 2/3 with 2./3 in
if abs(varia-root)<2/3:
will help a little.. :^) By itself, th
Leif wrote:
> Any reasonable compiler does constant folding and loop-invariant code
> motion; even Python's byte-code compiler should do that.
Almost none is done. Only the most trivial cases are handled. For
example, addition:
sage: preparser(False)
sage: type(2)
sage: def f():
:
Property doesn't work quite like you think it might: the property
needs to possess certain inheritance features. (Frankly, I might have
named it "heritable_property" or something instead.)
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6210
and
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread
I think problems caused by the log(10,2) ~ 3.32192 assumption occur in
several places throughout Sage, and it's the source of at least one
bug report (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10164). The
following all look suspicious to me:
misc/functional.py:prec = int((digits+1) *
> Any ideas on the cube graph error? I tried giving it an integer, but it
> still wasn't happy.
The TypeError looks like a sign that someone assumed that the vertices
would be integers and non-integer labels managed to sneak through some
code path somehow. No idea how long CubeGraph(5) would take
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> This patch to properly evaluate erf() still needs review, it should
> apply cleanly to sage-4.8.alpha2 or later:
There's also http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/1173 with a
different approach.
I'm fine with letting #1173 fade in fav
There was a question on ask.sagemath.org --
http://ask.sagemath.org/question/995/show-function-for-graphs-is-not-working
-- about some unusual graph display issues, where the graph plot being
shown didn't seem to correspond to the graph. My first thought was
that it was user error, esp. given that
> I pushed the change to test.sagenb.org. Can you verify that the problem is
> fixed there? Whenever sagenb.org is rebooted, the change will take effect
> there too.
Looks to have fixed it. As long as the random seed on the notebook
code side can't accidentally be changed from within a cell, it
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> It's easy.
>
> 1) Download and build a pristine copy of Sage for testing.
> 2) Apply http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12486 to the
> sage-scripts directory.
> 3) Run sage --patchbot
There are maybe two tweaks to these directions I
> I think it's very appropriate to open a ticket for this. It would be
> even more appropriate to try to construct a more minimal
> counterexample :) but at least then we have it on the record.
So far the best I can do is
f(t) = e^(-(4.007 - 3*I)*t)
integral(f, (t, 0, infinity))
*boom*
and not
>> sage: x,y = var('x y')
>> sage: plot_slope_field(sin(x+y)+cos(x+y), (x,-3,3), (y,-3,3))
>>
>> I think the documentation should explain the warnings, or the example
>> should be changed, right?
>
> This happens to be a known numpy bug. See:
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11208
>
>
Hello!
First time poster, so brief introduction: planetary astronomer, been
using Sage for years for both science and fun. I'm also one of the
Editors-in-Chief of the OEIS, and have been experimenting with using
Sage for bulk sequence processing and verification. I find writing in
Sage very comp
>> (1) gcd is broken. http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10459
[..]
> I'm personally OK either way with this.
IMO a*b = gcd(a,b)*lcm(a,b) should be maintained wherever possible.
There are pari codes whose direct Sage equivalent silently breaks for
this reason, and I can't bring myself to
@rjf:
> I don't know exactly how this came up, but if 2/1 is in a different domain
> (rational) from 2, (integer), then gcd should probably be 1, since any
> non-zero rational number divides any other, and one commonly uses the
> positive "unit" 1 for such a case.
One also commonly uses the c
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery
wrote:
> However one should be careful: the kwarg
> options are *not* mutually exclusive as long as they are consistent
> (for some loose definition of consistent), and this feature is used in
> many places.
My single most common use involves par
Well, someone asked for more posts.. not sure this is what he had in mind. ;-)
Forgive my being a bear of little brain, but I've yet to grasp why
defining the default gcd rational function to be equal to 1 or (from
Simon) the lcm equal to 1 would be a _useful_ thing to do, independent
of the exis
Don't comments show up on the main page via the mailbox on the top of
the page? I don't have email notification attached and I see it flag
when there's something new for me to look at in the comments. I seem
to get responses as often as I do on other question sites, so I don't
know if this is as
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 5:53 AM, Maxim wrote:
> It would sometimes see a '1' Integer not being the same as a
> '1' numpy.int32 value.
>
> This behaviour _cannot_ be reproduced with a minimal example such as:
>
> import numpy
>
> if numpy.int32(1) != sage.rings.integer.Integer(1):
> print("Shou
(1) I just started playing with this stuff, and found queues much
nicer than cloning; it's worth It might be good to add a few
explanations to the page of what to do in common-screwup cases (at
least for me): e.g. unapplying everything (even though there are
uncommitted changes), undoing an accid
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Stephen Hartke wrote:
> Assignment of a matrix to a matrix slice works as expected except for when
> the slice is 1x1; in that case, Sage expects a scalar instead of a 1x1
> matrix.
I think this has changed very recently. Your code seems to work in
4.6.2.rc0, bu
>> For what reason is var(s) not raising an error if not s.isalnum()?
>
> People might want to use utf-8 strings which won't be valid under that
> condition.
Even "x_1" fails an alnum check.
Another issue with var is that Python allows trailing commas in the
definitions of lists, sets, and tuples
> Does anyone have any idea why using a sage integer to index a numpy
> matrix would give me a row vector?!
9 times out of 10 behaviour like that's due to explicit type-checking
at some point instead of try-it-and-see duck typing.. and that seems
to be the case here (discussion on trac).
Doug
-
> I would not want the debate to move on to
> centre/center and so on.
I'm forever forgetting to use the American spellings for centre and
neighbour in Sage.
There is one case where I think the use of Americanisms means Sage is
simply wrong: the use of 'meter' for 'metre' in the units module. I'
Build succeeded and passed testall long for me on 10.5.8, xcode 3
(921.0/893.0), i686-apple-darwin9-gcc-4.0.1/i686-apple-darwin9-g++-4.0.1.
Quad-Core Intel Xeon.
Doug
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-d
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> On 2012-05-30, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> All of you who had trouble with "Illegal Instruction" errors or with the
>> Boost library on the sage-5.0 binaries:
> on OSX 10.6.8, Core 2 Duo, the corresponding ("64-bit") non-app binary
> appears
>> I used the "for loop" from earlier in the thread on Mac OS X (both 10.6.8
>> and 10.7.4). In both cases, all worked w/o crashing.
>>
>> Does this happen rarely, sometimes, frequently?
>
> It occurred for me about 4 times interactively while working on
> research yesterday. Anyway, thanks for
> So is this a bug, or is there some subtle aspect of the set { ... }
> constuction that I'm misusing?
Oy, that's cute! The second matrix index lives in Zmod(5), and behaves as such:
sage: wA = matrix(QuadraticField(2),5,{(j,mod(j+1,5)):1 for j in range(5)})
sage: wA.dict()
{(0, 1): 1, (1, 2): 1
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:24 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hello sage-devel/sage-notebook.
>
> I'm aware that http://sagenb.org is down, so there is no need for
> anybody to email me about this.
>
> It may be down for some time, due to abusive users. It (or
> something similar) will definitely be
> That said, I am wondering if this is perhaps a bug in the default
> implementation of determinant()?
> It seems strange to me that it takes 8 minutes to compute a determinant of a
> 34x34 matrix while other algorithms do it within a second.
Yeah, it looks like pari's Gauss-Bareiss takes foreve
Cool!
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> Great! Can you make a trac account for yourself and a ticket with your
> patch? The patch needs a commit message. Also, minor nitpick:
>
> if len(extent_) is not 4:
> raise TypeError, "extent must be a list with 4 el
>> As far as I understand, Python 3 will allow to achieve the same using
>> the natural syntax `def f(x: int, y: float) : ...`, with flexibility
>> on what "type" can be.
>
> Unfortunately, type declarations, with that syntax, was *proposed* for
> Python 3, but then soundly rejected by Guido as "to
> Ah, interesting. I guess Guido just didn't like part of the
> notation.Note that the declaration doesn't actually do anything:
>
def f(a: int, b: float) -> (float, str):
> ... print(a,b)
> ...
f(2.5,3)
> 2.5 3
Yeah, IIRC enforcing this was a non-starter, and the decision was to
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:58 PM, kcrisman wrote:
> This caused an interact in class today to break. Yikes. Why does this no
> longer work?
>
> --
> | Sage Version 5.7.rc0, Release Date: 2013-02-16 |
> | Type
I think this is at heart an IPython-related bug, not something
Sage-specific.
I can't reproduce this at the moment -- natch -- but I've had exactly this
symptom from time to time when using ?? to look at source when using
IPython outside of Sage. One afternoon it was driving me crazy but I was
to
Having been dabbling in Julia myself, I can agree it's definitely
worth a look for people interested in numerical programming and lispy
metaprogramming facilities. For people coming from other languages it
can take a while to figure out where exactly you're supposed to *put*
things, and the type s
On the subject of 3, for anyone who hasn't been following, a number of
teams on the science stack have thought about Aaron's argument and are
making plans:
https://python3statement.github.io/
Doug
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
36 matches
Mail list logo
