On Nov 3, 2006, at 12:08 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Actually, I'm going to do this:
>
>SageObject
>|
>|
> \|/
> Parent
>|
>|
> \|/
> ParentWithGens
>
> Since the "Object" in ParentObject is redundant, and this is more
> consistent
> with "Elem
On Nov 3, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Bill Page wrote:
>
> Maybe it is interesting to consider how Axiom handles these
> coercions? For example:
>
> sage: x = axiom('x::MPOLY([x],INT)')
> sage: x.type()
> MultivariatePolynomial([x],Integer)
> sage: y = axiom('y::MPOLY([y],INT)')
> sage: y.type()
> Multiva
On Nov 3, 2006, at 1:57 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Also, since I'm making so many changes to Pyrex, to avoid confusion (or
> making the
> Pyrex author angry) I'm going to call the SAGE branch of Pyrex by the
> name
> "Syrex",
> which means "SAGE Pyrex".
Surely you meant to say Spyrex.
Also, S
On Nov 3, 2006, at 1:57 PM, William Stein wrote:
> FYI -- I just made complete nicely documted Pyrex declarations for the
> entire Python/C
> API for SAGE (so nobody else do this). They'll be in the
> devel/sage/sage/ext subdirectory
> in the next release, and will make it easy to use any Pyth
On Nov 3, 2006, at 2:51 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Nov 2006 11:42:29 -0800, alex clemesha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> I vote for Spyrex too, not syrex ... that sounds like some medical
>> device :)
>
> Robert Bradshaw pointed out that Spyrex sounds like *spyware*! Also,
> when
William (stein),
Thanks for doing these. At some point I'm going to do all of these
benchmarks *properly*, and this stuff will be a useful reference to
work from.
In particular I'm going to work within each system as far as possible
(not through a SAGE wrapper) so we can get as fair a sense o
On Nov 15, 2006, at 5:00 PM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I've implemented a very naive cache for finite extension field
> elements in the
> Givaro wrapper. Basically, all elements are created when the field
> is created
> and references are returned by the arithmetic methods: Th
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/
On Nov 16, 2006, at 1:53 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>> But I can see why it would be faster, given all the crap that sits
>> between us and those 16 bits.
>>
>> I don't necessarily have a problem with what you're doing, but in the
>> long run, we're better off just bloody well implementing the f
On Nov 16, 2006, at 7:45 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
>> Ah. Are you saying what you've done is a bit like the situation where
>> Python caches int object?
>
> Yes, but I can cache all elements and they have to maintain a FIFO or
> something similar. We might want some generic FIFO / dict hybrid
I just had an idea for how to use the givaro idea to handle much larger
fields.
From what I understand, givaro represents field elements in say GF(2^n)
as g^k where g is a generator. i.e. it stores the integer k. So
multiplications can be done as a single addition mod 2^n - 1, and
additions
On Nov 28, 2006, at 10:30 PM, William Stein wrote:
> I want to buy a couple more workstations specifically for SAGE
> developers
> to have to log into and optimize code for. What should I buy?
Probably G5s should be further down your list. Maybe they're decent
machines, but they will be hi
On Nov 30, 2006, at 1:35 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Note -- there's a new potentially controversial change!
> Now by default the left control pane (with the worksheet list,
> etc.,) is *off*. To see it click on "Control Bar" in the upper
> left of the screen. What do you think?
Fantastic. Tha
On Nov 30, 2006, at 8:50 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> IntegerModRing now has a method precompute_table() which will create
>> a cached table of all ring elements which cuts down on the overhead a
>
> I've applied your patch and it does indeed speed things up. Thanks.
>
>> lot. Perhaps this shoul
On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:40 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> If it's 1MB per ring, then I only have to be
>> working modulo 500 or so integers simultaneously --- not at all a
>> far-
>> fetched situation --- before my typical desktop PC runs out of RAM.
>
> We could only automatically cache up to 50 r
On Nov 30, 2006, at 10:19 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>> On the other hand, if you create a large number of elements modulo
>>> one
>>> integer with the caching you won't run out of memory, whereas
>>> without
>>> it you might very well run out.
>>
>> I'm not so sure about this. If you cache,
On Nov 30, 2006, at 10:34 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> It's really incredible that MAGMA goes faster than python ints here.
>> From memory, at sage days 2, our Integer stuff was still a factor of
>> 7-10 away from python ints, at least for addition.
>
> I don't know what benchmark you were doing
On Nov 30, 2006, at 10:54 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> You need to try this last one again in pyrex, using a cdef int i for
>> the loop counter, and doing the arithmetic with python ints; and then
>> compare that to the same thing using SAGE Integers.
>
> OK, I've done that. But honestly, I don'
On Dec 1, 2006, at 12:29 AM, William Stein wrote:
>> It's really incredible that MAGMA goes faster than python ints here.
>> From memory, at sage days 2, our Integer stuff was still a factor of
>> 7-10 away from python ints, at least for addition.
>
> Python ints:
>
> (1) Have a custom opti
On Dec 3, 2006, at 12:56 AM, Bobby Moretti wrote:
>
>>> These are all good reasons... I wish there was a better way than
>>> having a predefined list of indeterminates... I could see all
>>> sorts of
>>> things being screwed up that way.
>>
>> Such as?
>
> Sorry, I was sort of thinking out lou
On Dec 3, 2006, at 3:25 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
> My comments above lead me to believe that we really need to step
> outside the
> polynomial ring box though.
I tentatively agree with this assessment. Polynomial rings don't seem
to be the right thing here.
David
--~--~-~--~
On Dec 4, 2006, at 12:00 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Searching for "sage" on google today dropped from page 2 all the
> way to
> page 4! Yuck.
> However, seaching for "sage math" or "sage.math" brings up the SAGE
> webpage as
> the top hit. Thus I hope everyone here will tell people
On Dec 4, 2006, at 7:52 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Bill Hart wrote:
>> Hi Nick,
>>
>> FLINT is really in its infancy, and it certainly will be pyrexed into
>> SAGE at the earliest opportunity.
>
> Does FLINT depend on sage? Will it depend on sage?
>
> I guess I'm still a little confused about
On Dec 5, 2006, at 12:55 AM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I've posted to the list a few times, but William asked me to post a
> short introduction. My name is Nick Alexander; I'm a graduate student
> at University of California, Irvine. Before UCI I was at
> University of
>
On Dec 5, 2006, at 12:29 PM, William Stein wrote:
> You know, honestly, the problem of how to express do Calculus with
> a computer algebra system is not exactly a new one. It's been
> to some degree completely and totally solved by Mathematica.
> Maybe the real discussion we should be having i
On Dec 6, 2006, at 12:39 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> The main difficulty with def/lamdba is how would one do calculus with
> one of these functions?
Yeah, like if def f(x): ... and def g(x): ... then how do I write f + g?
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post t
On Dec 6, 2006, at 8:14 PM, David Joyner wrote:
>
> This is brilliant, IMHO.
>
>
> On 12/6/06, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Sage calculus
>> f = alg expr
But what does "f = alg expr" mean? Do you mean using predefined
single-character variables?
David
--~--~-~--~-
On Dec 7, 2006, at 7:27 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:06:47 -0800, Nick Alexander
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> In fact, a patch has been submitted but not applied to Greg Ewing
>> implementing such a feature. The change is described at
>>
>> http://www.cosc.can
On Dec 7, 2006, at 6:32 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'm aware that malformed elements are not supposed to be sent into
> SageX code, but you can get all manner of hard to debug crashes when
> they are. For example, in element.pyx, there are no checks that
> ._parent._base is we
On Dec 7, 2006, at 9:53 PM, William Stein wrote:
> I decided in the end that all parent structures for elements would
> have a base (which can be something degenerae or trivial in some
> cases).
Fair enough. Interesting design choice. I guess it keeps the class
hierarchy simpler.
David
--~-
On Dec 9, 2006, at 12:04 AM, William Stein wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Alex and I spent an hour tonight and turned on the SAGE
> Notebook markup mode. I tried it out and was immediately
> shocked by how flexible and powerful this is. See,
> e.g.,
> http://sage.math.washington.edu:8101/markup
Will
Does anyone else think that 173.binary() should be legal? Currently the
preparser mangles it into a syntax error, it thinks the dot is a
decimal point. One currently needs to do (173).binary() instead.
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send ema
On Dec 13, 2006, at 3:06 PM, Iftikhar Burhanuddin wrote:
> On the same lines, I would be happy is tab completion worked in the
> following scenario.
>
> sage: SupersingularModule(11).
>
> Should this be legal? And should be implemented without actually
> creating
> the oject with *just* syntati
The logo on the notebook these days is quite striking. Perhaps that
should go on the main SAGE website.
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
F
On Dec 15, 2006, at 12:54 PM, Iftikhar Burhanuddin wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Iftikhar Burhanuddin wrote:
>>> SAGe's favicon is the word "SAGE", but rotated at an angle so it
>>> looks neat.
>
> Now that the new logo has made it to
> http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
>
> I propose that
On Dec 18, 2006, at 8:15 AM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
> In my pyrexification of the complex_number class, I found an amusing
> pyrex
> bug. I'm not sure if one of you pyrex hacker experts of our community
> want
> to take a crack at fixing it or if I should just report it upstream.
NIce bug. We
On Dec 18, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>
> As I'm thinking about these complex numbers, something occurred to me.
>
> sage: I.parent()
> Complex Field with 53 bits of precision
> sage: ZZ(1).parent()
> Integer Ring
> sage: (1+I).parent()
> Complex Field with 53 bits of precision
>
>
On Dec 18, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>
> I'm curious whether anyone has done any benchmarking about whether it
> is
> actually faster to call
> a._add_c(b)
> instead of
> a+b
> in pyrex code. Calling _add_c directly is the recommended fast way in
> element.pyx. Howe
On Dec 18, 2006, at 2:03 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>
> On Monday 18 December 2006 12:28, David Harvey wrote:
>> Have you tried calling them from within a pyrex loop with a C index
>> variable?
>
> You might want to look pretty carefully at this to see if I'm t
On Dec 18, 2006, at 3:34 PM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>> You need
>>
>> cdef int i;
>>
>> otherwise you are using a python integer as the loop variable.
>
> Good point. Not much difference though:
[...]
Yeah I agree, this sucks. I've tried a few versions myself, and I can
find a difference of u
On Dec 18, 2006, at 7:49 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:33:49 -0800, David Harvey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> By the way, this is an *excellent* reason to add semantics to the
>> arithmetic architecture for doing inplace arithmetic. T
On Dec 18, 2006, at 8:52 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> Python already has inplace operators.
>
> Not really -- it's only notational. You are not actually changing
> the number being pointed at -- it is immutable:
>
> 001-779-517:~ was$ sage -python
> Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Dec 14 2006, 18:27:35)
On Dec 19, 2006, at 7:52 AM, Joel B. Mohler wrote:
>
> On Monday 18 December 2006 23:29, Bill Hart wrote:
>> David Harvey and I have (still) been working on polynomial
>> multiplication in the FLINT library which will eventually be included
>> in SAGE. I thought some new
On Dec 19, 2006, at 11:44 PM, William Stein wrote:
All the numerical types in Python are immutable, and a huge range of
Python functionality, e.g., sets, dicts, etc., require that the
objects
they work with are immutable. Yes, the Python language does have a
notation for mutable objects, b
On Dec 20, 2006, at 1:32 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 06:09:52 -0700, David Harvey
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If that
happens, then they can't be elemnts of sets or keys of
dictionaries, and
caching of charpolys and other invariants of objects becomes
impo
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.or
Starting to suspect sabotage here last time I was at UW I thought
I saw some guy sneaking around who had a logo on his t-shirt that
resembled one of the major commerical mathematics software packages.
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this grou
On Dec 23, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
Maybe it's god's way of telling you to enjoy the holidays :-}
Yeah I guess sage.math deserves a holiday too. I tried doing a
length 16 fourier transform by hand a few days ago, and now I better
appreciate the conditions under which
Hi guys,
Is it possible to make animations in SAGE? Like, if I use the graphics
functionality to make a series of images, is there any way to plug a
sequence of images together to generate some kind of movie file? I
don't even know what format I would expect the animation to be in, but
I'm w
On Jan 3, 2007, at 1:04 PM, William Stein wrote:
* Implement in SageX the following ring elements:
* CC -- arbitrary precision complex numbers
* IR -- interval arithmetic ring
* k[x] -- polynomial ring over arbitrary ring
* First version of FLINT (Hart and Harvey's C library)
On Jan 3, 2007, at 3:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I'll do (b)
- Robert
Dude you absolutely ROCK!
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jan 3, 2007, at 3:14 PM, William Stein wrote:
What's the status with multi-modular methods? I was thinking of
starting on this, but wasn't sure if you had done anything.
I haven't done anything beyond what's in the current release.
One thing for you to do is to fix the asymptotically fas
On Jan 4, 2007, at 6:03 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 13:40:19 -0800, Bill Hart
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It occured to me that the best way to provide this stuff directly to
SAGE, and improve a whole raft of other things is to include our code
in the SAGE version of Pari.
On Jan 4, 2007, at 6:57 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 15:43:53 -0800, David Harvey
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(a). This is my own personal bias, because I can see step-by-step
how it could bedone; it is straightforward. PARI integration
sounds much harder.
On Jan 4, 2007, at 7:02 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
You beat me too it--I think (a) and (b) are not at all mutually
exclusive, but it will probably pushing it to have the easier of
the two by sage 2.0. I think (b) would be very straightforward--I
don't know what the data structure is fo
On Jan 4, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Bill Hart wrote:
I'm happy if people think they can write wrappers etc in time, to have
SAGE just work directly with FLINT objects. Polynomial multiplication
should be working by Monday-ish. But how I proceed might depend on
what
people think about this. So, shou
On Jan 8, 2007, at 10:04 AM, William Stein wrote:
It would be easy to change the current complex_number.pyx to use
(a+bi)(c+di) = (a+b)(c+d)i - (ac+bd)i + (ac-bd)
especially if the precision issue isn't an issue if the real
and imaginary parts have the same precision (??).
I think the is
On Jan 13, 2007, at 6:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it just me, or is everybody getting 3 copies of every message sent
from sage-devel?
Yeah me too.
Yeah me too.
Yeah me too.
Yeah me too.
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email
On Jan 10, 2007, at 4:11 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I just finished adding list comprehension to sagex. I also optimized
the for loop over lists, so they are now both essentially as fast as
the FAST_SEQ_UNSAFE stuff (and have better failure semantics if the
list is altered/deleted during the
On Jan 15, 2007, at 8:09 AM, David Kohel wrote:
Any ideas how to get a random number from 1 to n in SAGE?
Here's a bad way to do it:
sage: n = 10^2
sage: G = SymmetricGroup(n)
sage: G.random()(1)
which will blow up as n goes to infinity.
Here's a slightly better one:
sage: x = random()
sa
Hi,
I've just done a clean install on sage.math from sage-1.7.tar.
After running "make", I tried "./sage -b", and I get:
--
sage: Building and installing modified SAGE library files.
sage/modules/free_module_element.pyx -->
/home/dmharv
Oh look, I've been involved in Sage since mid-2006. This is the first
major strategic decision with which I've disagreed so strongly, and
the first time I've felt truly unwelcome on this list. It's quite
depressing.
I sincerely believe the costs of the fork to the community outweigh
the benefits.
On Apr 24, 2:26 pm, Tim Abbott wrote:
> As I understand it, David Harvey isn't physically at NYU yet and nobody
> had mentioned the patch to Victor prior to my sending it to Victor.
Actually, I've been physically at NYU since last July, i.e. almost a
year. But Victor
On May 6, 10:41 am, kcrisman wrote:
> So is there any final consensus on this? Is the following Sage
> program automatically GPL?
>
> {{{
> 2+2
>
> }}}
>
> Or only in the following form?
>
> {{{
> Integer(2)+Integer(2)
>
> }}}
>
> Please no flames! I only wanted to know if there was a consens
On May 19, 1:58 pm, Ralf-Philipp Weinmann
wrote:
> zn_poly/pack.c:86:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet
> zn_poly/pack.c:168:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet
> zn_poly/pack.c:252:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet
> zn_poly/pack.c:351:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet
> zn_poly/pack.c:43
On May 19, 11:17 pm, David Harvey wrote:
> On May 19, 1:58 pm, Ralf-Philipp Weinmann
> wrote:
>
> > zn_poly/pack.c:86:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet
> > zn_poly/pack.c:168:2: error: #error Not nails-safe yet
> > zn_poly/pack.c:252:2: error: #error Not nails-
On May 19, 11:41 pm, mabshoff wrote:
> Well, in this case it is completely ironic that the zn_poly 0.9 code
> in FLINT is compiled, but not used since it causes a doctest failure
> in the Monsky code. When using only FLINT it passes the doctest. The
> failure is a different one compared to when
I'm an idiot, it's a not a bug. I misunderstood the definition of
change_ring. Sorry for the noise.
david
On May 29, 7:46 pm, dmharvey wrote:
> Is this a bug?
>
> sage: version()
> 'Sage Version 3.4.2, Release Date: 2009-05-05'
> sage: S. = PolynomialRing(Integers(14641))
> sage: f = 1 + 9581*t
Hmmm let me try again. Would appreciate help from people familiar with
FLINT wrapper and/or coercion system.
sage: R. = PolynomialRing(Integers(121))
sage: S. = PolynomialRing(Integers(11))
sage: S(50*x)
6*y
sage: R(S(50*x))
50*x # !!
I think what's actually happening is that the underly
On May 29, 10:54 pm, David Harvey wrote:
> Hmmm let me try again. Would appreciate help from people familiar with
> FLINT wrapper and/or coercion system.
>
> sage: R. = PolynomialRing(Integers(121))
> sage: S. = PolynomialRing(Integers(11))
> sage: S(50*x)
> 6*y
>
output from FLINT with that
> of Pari. Thus helped us track down the specific polynomial computation
> which caused the issue last time.
>
> Bill.
>
> On 30 May, 06:11, David Harvey wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 10:54 pm, David Harvey wrote:
>
> > > Hmmm let me tr
On Jun 15, 9:57 am, William Stein wrote:
> File
> "/Users/was/build/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage/doc/en/bordeaux_2008/birds_other.rst",
> line 212:
> sage: w = bernoulli(10, num_threads=16) # 1.87 seconds
> Exception raised:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
[...]
This is now
I disagree with this change. One of the main purposes of interval
arithmetic is to be able to take a function f(x) that operates on
floats, and pass in intervals instead, to determine the possible range
of outputs a given input interval could produce. This change violates
that paradigm. The author
I am confused. I want to release bernmm 1.1 under the (modified) BSD
license. It depends on NTL, which is GPL-licensed. Can I do this? Or
am I forced to release bernmm under GPL?
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@g
Ok, thanks. I knew it had to be a silly question :-)
david
On Oct 1, 3:22 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM, David Harvey wrote:
>
> > I am confused. I want to release bernmm 1.1 under the (modified) BSD
> > license. It depends on NTL, which is GPL-
On Mar 5, 1:10 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> > Can you 'backport' code from a GPL3L+ code base to a [L]GPLv2+ code
> > base? Just curious.
>
> Not code, but you can read the release notes and then fix the bugs
> yourself.
Surely this becomes a stupid waste of time at some point. Not
reinvent
On Mar 5, 10:28 pm, Bill Hart wrote:
> Let's clear up another misconception here. GPL v3+ software is NOT
> banned from Sage. This is explicitly stated online.
Where does it say this? The comments on this thread suggest that Sage
will not upgrade to the next release of MPFR solely because of
On Mar 6, 7:27 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> I would guess that sooner or
> later we will accept GPL3 packages into Sage, while still maintaining
> the GPL2-only version for a while (which will become more and more
> obsolete as GPL3 upstream packages evolve). Time will tell.
I hope this
On Mar 6, 9:49 am, William Stein wrote:
> > As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available,
> > and it does not include any GPL3 code.
>
> It does.
Ah. So am I correct in deducing that MSR employees are unable to use
Sage 3.3?
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~
Hmmm okay, it looks like I have been guilty of contributing to some of
the misinformation on this thread. My apologies for this.
david
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email
Hi,
I had the same problem a month or two ago with sage 3.1.2 (?) but
didn't report it.
I had the same problem just now with sage 3.3. I tried fixing the NTL
build by removing the -p options but then the build failed for
whatever came next (eclib I believe).
Then I found this thread and realise
On Mar 15, 10:00 pm, Justin Walker wrote:
> The short answer is: we're working on it (as a part of an SD14
> project). The whole schemes directory is being "scrubbed" (and of
> course, it takes time to figure out what is intended, before cleaning
> it up).
>
> Trac items will appear in d
gt;
>
> On 15-Mar-09, at 7:59 PM, Alex Ghitza wrote:
>
> > Hi David,
>
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 1:12 PM, David Harvey
> > wrote:
>
> > Ah. The reason I asked is that various people have requested that I
> > write a better wrapper for my hypellfrob
Hi guys,
Thanks for looking into this. I ended up working around the problem by
lifting to Z and doing the charpoly there (I know in advance the
output precision, and the complexity is not that important for my
application, so it's no big deal). I've put up a patch for review
here: http://sagetra
On Apr 21, 3:08 pm, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> I wish all forks could be as amicable as the Pyrex/Cython one, but
> understandably that is rarely the case. I support the reasons behind
> MPIR, but I think it's a very good thing to provide a GMP spkg for
> Sage--it gives users the choice.
B
On Apr 21, 2:31 pm, Bill Hart wrote:
> In some cases it would be less work to just contribute features
> directly to MPIR to bring the current code up to par.
I think you are underestimating how much work it is to design, write
and debug these things.
And whatever happened to "not reinventing
On Apr 21, 8:06 pm, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> The only doctests that break are the xgcd ones, right? This has been
> an issue before, and so I think perhaps the doctests should be improved.
Also some doctests related to modular symbols. I don't know enough
about this area to tell whether it's
On Apr 21, 8:31 pm, Craig Citro wrote:
> I also would like to see both a gmp and mpir spkg available. Even if
> someone never wanted to use gmp (for whatever reasons, be they
> licensing or other), I think it would be good to have both easily
> available -- for consistency checks, benchmarking,
On Apr 21, 8:41 pm, mabshoff wrote:
> GMP-ECM 6.2.2 should be in the next Sage release. Is this fix that you
> put in thet ecm-gmp.spkg already upstream?
No I don't think so. I believe Paul Zimmermann is aware of the issue,
but you might want to ping him about it.
I don't recommend using the
Hi,
sage: K = Qp(13, 5)
sage: 13^5
371293
sage: y = K(10)
sage: z = K(20)
sage: timeit("x = y * z")
625 loops, best of 3: 961 ns per loop # varies a bit but this is
typical
sage: timeit("x = y + z")
625 loops, best of 3: 942 ns per loop # ditto
That's the cost of arithmetic. Pret
Dear sage-devel,
Sage is very slow. I discovered this (again) while trying to write a
prototype of an algorithm for computing zeta functions of projective
varieties. I need to multiply lots of polynomials and matrices over
finite rings, and frequently move coefficients between polynomials
Consider the following script, which saves a p-adic matrix and then
repeatedly loads it into a list:
==
from time import time
K = Qp(13, 10)
M = Matrix(K, [[K.random_element() for j in range(200)] for k in range(200)])
M.save("thing.sobj")
L = []
for i in range(40
401 - 492 of 492 matches
Mail list logo
