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
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
Hey all,
At some point in the near future I may try to bring the implementation of
power series rings more into line with the p-adics. The single variable
case seems straightforward, but a something popped up for me when thinking
about the multivariable case.
What is the appropriate analogue of l
This is one of the things I'd been planning on adding to the new programming
guide.
Your issue is that you're creating a new directory. When you do that, you
have to add that directory to the list of packages at the bottom of
setup.pyin sage-root/devel/sage-branch/
You should also put an __init__
It's fixed (patch posted to trac). As suspected, it was a bug introduced in
the ell_rational_field refactoring.
David
On Nov 21, 2007 12:25 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 20, 2007 1:40 PM, Paul Zimmermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >William,
> >
> > sage told
I have to agree. The slide where you list p-adic numbers, p-adic
L-functions and p-adic height pairings kinda jumped out at me. While I'm
obviously interested in that kind of stuff, it won't appeal as much to a
non-specialist audience.
One might argue that as things implemented natively in Sage,
Addition not commuting there bothers me. I can see why it's happening: a
SymPy object doesn't call into the coercion system. One possible solution
is to have coercion map sage objects into sympy, so both s+o and o+s (in
line 134 and 135 of test_sympy.py) would be SymPy objects. Is SymPy and the
> I don't think so, since probably sage/maxima have special functions
> sympy doesn't. And even if it could be, the functions provided by
> SymPy are different
> than the ones provided by SymbolicRing.
>
> If sympy('x') + x and x + sympy('x') are totally different in Sage I
> will be unhappy about
Excellent list! Maybe I should take a break from p-adics and do some of
these. Some of the gaps should be quite easy to fill in.
David
On Nov 30, 2007 12:45 PM, Stephen Forrest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I've lurked on this list for a time, commenting little because I am
> no
My housemates have been writing a Python wrapper for SVDLIBC (a C library
that does SVDs for sparse and dense matrices over the reals) using Swig. I
suggested that they use Cython instead and thought that this might make a
good spkg. I've asked a few people about sparse SVDs, and I think Sage
cur
The issue is that since Sage uses pari to do everything in the background,
one needs to create the pari data structures, which means that you currently
call nfinit on the number field, which computes the class group and unit
group. This should change eventually, but right now...
David
On Dec 29,
It worked for me.
David
On Jan 6, 2008 1:08 AM, Joshua Kantor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello. for the dvd we are including a dmg file. There was some
> problems with the initial version of this. I believe the following is
> working,
> but if anyone else could test that following the instruc
> > David, can you test the md5sum of the downloaded .dmg file.
> > At the terminal
> > md5
>
> FWIW, I get:
>
> MD5 (/SandBox/DownLoads/sage-2.9.2-osx10.4-intel-i386-Darwin.dmg) =
> 7bdaf64293d8136aa0d59c89b894ca79
>
I get the same:
MD5 (sage-2.9.2-osx10.4-intel-i386-Darwin.dmg) =
7bdaf64293d81
One way to do it is to use the Python functions on strings. For example, if
you want to use the real double field (RDF) and matrix_data is your string,
the following should do what you want:
M = matrix(RDF, [b.split() for b in matrix_data.split('\n')])
The split method of a string creates a list
That looks quite cool.
spkg's are generally for non-Python files. The way to put a Python file
into sage is to convert your .sage file to a .py file (for example, changing
"^" to "**" throughout) and then putting it somewhere with the sage library
files (for example, in $SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage-main
Note that I just put up a ticket with patch (1795) that fixes sage-coverage
so that it checks cdef'd and cpdef'd functions and classes.
David
On Jan 16, 2008 12:00 PM, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 16 January 2008, mabshoff wrote:
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > after doing
My modification to sage-coverage checks to see that doctests are present in
the docstring of a cdef'd function but doesn't check that the function name
is there (because it usually won't be).
David
On Jan 16, 2008 2:24 PM, Nick Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 16-Jan-08, at 11:17 AM,
> Of course, it'd be nice if every function had ample documentation,
> but I'd rather have 100% coverage on all user-accessible functions in
> two files, than 100% coverage in one file for def/cpdef and cdef
> functions. Also, often the "inderect" tests for cdef functions seem
> to be redundant wit
With the modifications, our overall coverage is at 33.1%.
David
On Jan 16, 2008 2:56 PM, mabshoff <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 16, 8:51 pm, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Of course, it'd be nice if every function had am
y, but then I'm the
one that originally made the design decision, so
David
On Jan 17, 2008 9:52 AM, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks (especially william + robert + david roe),
>
> I showed up for Doc Days 1 and started looking at the infi
So perhaps the solution to your problem is the extended integers (or
extended rationals). This needs some work (both in terms of speed and with
having multiple types for elements of the same parent), but it does have the
benefit of returning 1 as the answer to 1 + 0/infinity. Perhaps the default
What kinds of geometric objects do your forms live on? Algebraic curves and
varieties? Manifolds? Manifolds with boundary?
David
On Feb 1, 2008 8:00 AM, Peter Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to either develop or find a method for computing with
> differential forms
So, these kinds of issues were the subject of the coercion project at SD7.
Robert Bradshaw, Mike Hansen, Bobby Moretti and I are currently in the
process of changing a lot of the infrastructure behind parents, elements,
etc. If you want to help (or want to see our current progress) see the
sprint
This is doctest where the result used to be
Traceback (most recent call
last):
...
TypeError: cannot create a p-adic out of
but after the p-adics patch it started working and returning p. I looked at
it briefly and couldn't figure out why it was doing so.
David
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:16 PM
> Here are the pow_computer failures:
> sage -t devel/sage-main/sage/rings/padics/pow_computer.pyx
> **
> File "pow_computer.pyx", line 160:
>sage: PC._pow_mpz_t_tmp_demo(6, 8)
> Expected:
>244140625
> Got:
>1525878906
In this context I think that binary means all the entries are 1s and zeros.
But when you look for a set of rows that add up to [1,1,1,...], you don't
consider 1+1=0. This makes sense when you want only one 1 to appear in each
column, which is a natural requirement, and makes the problem much harde
A friend of mine also pointed out the following, which uses Sage to compare
runtimes for different algorithms:
Dan Boneh, Craig Gentry, Michael Hamburg. http://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/pubs.html";>Space-efficient identity based
encryption without pairings (37 pages), Proceedings FOCS 2007.
David
I think they should still exist, but should be cdef'd. This means I can
interface between C longs and sage Integers without having to reach in and
grab n.value, but one can't use them to make Integers mutable in Python. A
function get_si() would also be useful if it did bounds checking so that I
t you
don't have to rewrite the overflow checking each time: I've done that over
and over).
David
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Carl Witty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mar 3, 5:42 am, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think they should
ROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Monday 03 March 2008 08:42:53 am David Roe wrote:
> > I think they should still exist, but should be cdef'd. This means I can
> > interface between C longs and sage Integers without having to reach in
> and
> > grab n.value, but one can't u
I agree with the choice of _sage_init_. By default this can return
self._repr_(), but should be overridden in cases like matrix.
David
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 1:32 AM, Robert Bradshaw <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> _sage_init_ sounds like the right solution. The problem is that for
> many object
There are tons of examples of things in the sage library: just look for .pyx
files. In particular, many of the matrix files are written in cython: look
in sage.matrix.
For loops, use the syntax:
cdef Py_ssize_t i
cdef long n = 17
for i from 0 <= i < n:
do_stuff()
Hope this helps.
David
On F
Note that the function that is called by "^" is __xor__. So you can already
do a.__xor__(b). If you want to write the function that David describes,
calling a.__xor__(b) is better than using eval.
David
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 6:34 AM, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Another solutio
It's in progress. See http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/2291
David
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 9:28 AM, bump <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Feb 19, 1:27 pm, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This should be pretty easy (though multiv
Splitting it like this still yields a linear algorithm. If f(n) is
the time to add a list of length n, then you have
f(n) = 2*f(n/2), so f(n) is linear.
David
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear Sage team,
>
> i made a few timings with the "sum" func
Separate from the coercion model, I have some ideas for changing where
printing code lives (see the section on printers at the bottom of
http://www.sagemath.org:9001/days7/coercion). I agree that it should
be easy to implement output into other formats, and I'll keep that in
mind when I actually
We are considering a more advanced model
> > (David Roe has lots of ideas on this front), but this falls outside
> > of the central focus coercion scheme. (This is one reason to use
> > _repr_ rather than the Python __repr__ so that the base object's
> > __repr__ can do
I'm back from my three week trip to the west coast and will take a look at this.
David
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jen Balakrishnan spent time with some of the usual suspects during the
> Arizona Winter School tracking down bugs in the p-adics,
If you take a look at the source code for n(), you'll see that the
first thing that it does is to try calling numerical_approx(prec) on
the object, and then tries coercing to real or complex fields. So the
solution is to write a method numerical_approx(prec) in the matrix
base class that tries to
I think Willem fixed this bug. I've made the same change a few other
places and added a doctest.
David
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jen Balakrishnan spent time with some of the usual suspects during the
> Arizona Winter School tracking down bugs
No, I forgot to change it back. Use the patch I posted instead, which
changes all the eis_shift_a's back to eis_shift. The p-adics folder
passes sage -t now.
David
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 8:53 PM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 11, 12:35 am, "
On the other hand, using a leading zero to indicate octal is a fairly
standard convention in computer science. And it's nice to minimize
these kinds of differences between Python ints and Sage Integers.
David
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Harald Schilly
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr
e sizes that Willem is
> talking about:
>
> > ConwayPolynomial(3,100);
>^
> Runtime error in 'ConwayPolynomial': A conway polynomial for GF(3^100) is not
> known
>
> David Roe and I (and probably some other people) talked about this way
>
Grrr... I clicked reply, and then tried to click on the text field to
begin typing, and it scrolled down at exactly the wrong moment and the
right amount so that I clicked send insteady. Sorry about that.
> David Roe and I (and probably some other people) talked about this way
> back
I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
David
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:29 PM, didier deshommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Currently
+1 from me as well. There have been a few times recently when I've
wished Sage included a component for solving linear programming or
integer programming optimization problems.
David
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Harald Schilly
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 20, 4:42 pm, "William Ste
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 5:13 PM, TimDaly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm surprised by how convinced you are that using a specific
> > technology/language -- literate programming -- can be a silver
> > bullet to solve such a difficult problem. I think peer review,
> > and many many other
Hey,
If you want to log onto sage-devel, I'm working on coercion and had a
few things to talk about.
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For mor
+1: Lattice as abelian group with inner product.
-1: Lattice as poset with meet and join
(of course I'm biased by number theory, though I admit that I have
heard of the second kind of lattice. ;-)
That being said, I'm glad people are working on the poset kind of
lattice: I'd wanted to do so for
One thing that Python has going for it here is that it's object
oriented. So f.differentiate() is disambiguated because f has a type.
The time when this doesn't help is object creation (thus the issue for
Lattices). It's worth having this discussion, and I agree that names
matter, but the probl
ufficiently well in Sage, and perhaps he feels some
> responsibility
> related to this since he did the current AbelianGroup implementation in Sage.
>
> I disagree with David -- if AbelianGroup is the right thing to derive
> form (I'm not saying it is!),
> but AbelianGr
I'm not going to be able to work much more on coercion until next
week, and I don't get the impression that Robert has much time this
week either. It's probably best to put coercion off until after
3.0.2.
David
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 11:44 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello folks
So, I think I was the one to rework infinity most recently. I don't
really have time today to expand at length on the issues you brought
up, but I agree with them to some extent. I will note that a coercion
is "a natural map into the object," which is why your first example
failed, but the __cal
I agree with Nick here. If we want to change the default behavior of
some functions so that they work the same as over the fraction field,
that's fine. But don't add a call to fraction field to the
constructor. ZZ is the initial object in the category of rings.
That's a good reason for it to be
Yeah, I arrive in Seattle on June 9.
David
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 1:20 AM, Nick Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 26-May-08, at 9:40 PM, David Roe wrote:
>>
>> I've gotten distracted by trying to do work that my advisor gave me.
>> I suspec
Algebraic topology.
David
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:32 AM, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dynamical systems - I think this now might be Sage's weakest area of
> mathematics. Getting AUTO/pydstool and other more specialized code in
> Sage is necessary if its going to have any appeal to t
One way to get around this limitation in python is to use callable
classes instead of functions.
David
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 10:42 AM, David Harvey
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 14, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Daniel Bump wrote:
>
>
> Some code that has been proposed by Nicolas Thiery
> for sage/
sage.math seems to be back up. At least, I'm logged in to it. ;-)
David
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:47 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> sage.math is down and I don't have physical access to the machine right now.
> Reminder: a backup from yesterday of everybody's file is
> BTW, I have also modified giac source, it should now compile with gcc
> 4.3.1.
Excellent!
> As I said earlier, I'm ready to invest time for that, but I can't do
> it alone, there must be someone on the python side who has time and
> interest to do it with my help.
I've seen a lot of acrimonio
I'm running OS X 10.4 and the warning about DT_TEXTREL doesn't appear
in my install log.
Good luck!
David
On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 3:51 AM, François Bissey
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Recently David Kirkby tried to compile sage on
> solaris express and it blew up on pari. Turns out
Great! This has been on my list of things I'd like to have
implemented for a while.
Presumably, much of this code will be incorporated into the Sage
library. So it's not really a "package" per se. Instead, you should
make a ticket on trac (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac), for which
you nee
Hey all,
Genya and I have code for p-adic ring and field classes and are
currently debugging and writing documentation. If you're interested
I've posted the four files at
sage.math.washington.edu/home/roed/padics07
I've been running into some trouble figuring out how to change
everything I need
They implement a somewhat modified version of the interfaces in the
folder. The folder also includes other classes that we haven't written
yet.
David
On Jan 25, 4:12 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 13:03:39 -0800, David Roe &
u, 25 Jan 2007 14:15:07 -0800, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > They implement a somewhat modified version of the interfaces in the
> > folder. The folder also includes other classes that we haven't written
> > yet.Did you start with the code in SAGE_ROOT/devel/
25, 5:59 pm, "David Roe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't know that the code in SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/sage/rings/padics
> was actually working. I'll take a look at it and see if I can just
> incorporate actual source into that framework.
> David
>
I'm actually working on a slightly different type of interval compare
for the p-adics. Lazy p-adics will return an interval as their
valuation if they're currently indistinguishable from 0: it will be of
the form [a, infinity] or [a, a]. If you compare such intervals, they
shrink themselves unti
If one types a[4:8:2] in Python, Python creates a slice object (call
it s) with s.start = 4, s.stop = 8 and s.step = 2. It then passes
this slice object to a's __getitem__ method. If one of the arguments
is left out, it is filled with None: so the slice [:8:2] would have
start None. However, if
I've been thinking about random elements a bit for p-adics. There are lots
of good and reasonable ways to generate random elements of things. For
example, in addition to Robert's suggestion, we could have a Gaussian
distribution with a specified mean, or a Poisson distribution... It seems
like a
I tried sending a response a while ago, but it didn't seem to get
through.
I'm including a response to David Kohel's e-mail at the bottom of
this.
> Congratulations on the new p-adic model. This really looks very
> promising and extensible.
Thanks.
> - It should be possible to create elements
> My mistake, but the errors let me think it was sage's fault. I typed
> pAdicRing(3,prec="lazy")
> which gets accepted. Doing anything with the ring afterwards leads to
> the
> above error. You should probably validate all construction parameters
> at construction time.
Sounds like a good idea.
Build (for rc3) went fine on my machine (32 bit MacBook Pro, OS X
10.4.9)
real61m23.087s
user38m43.449s
sys 15m50.664s
Make test:
All tests passed!
Total time for all tests: 1732.5 seconds
David
On Mar 25, 5:52 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you send the part of
Two things. First, order of operations is not what I would expect:
your first code is equivalent to
sage: 1 << (3 + 1.2).
Note that
sage: (1 << 3) + 1.2
9.20
works.
Secondly, the reason the second example works is that you can shift by
an integer n, and
it just multiplies by 2^n (bef
I sent this a little while ago but it didn't seem to go through...
sorry if it appears twice.
What do people think of having a canonical map between multivariate
polynomial rings when one's variables are a subset of the other's?
What about a subset in the same order? What about an initial subset
AIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/29/07, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I sent this a little while ago but it didn't seem to go through...
> > sorry if it appears twice.
>
> > What do people think of having a canonical map between multivariate
> &g
I guess I'm not totally sure what you meant by (3). Do you mean
(3) If (2) is satisfied, then for all v variables of R and w
variables of S that are not in R, v < w?
> Actually, whatever we do, we should make sure and require that
> the term orders on the two rings are compatible.
What is th
So, I'm planning on writing new classes for matrices and polynomials
over p-adics. Eventually there will probably be 8 new classes for
each of matrices and polynomials. Should these go in rings/padics?
rings/padics/polynomial and rings/padics/matrix? In rings/ and
matrix/? Move polynomial_eleme
I can try writing the matrices using SageX...
Then working with 1x1 matrices might be faster than working with
padics...
;-)
David
On Mar 29, 11:59 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/29/07, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So, I
which naive arithmetic leads
> > to very serious precision issues, so one wants to overload the default
> > algorithms with algorithms that behave more sensible.
> >
> > Also, it's entirely possible that David Roe has in mind, at least
> > in some
> > cases,
So, I think I might want to use the __new__ function of Matrix_integer_dense
directly, but I don't really know what I'm doing (thus contradicting the
warning in the docstring for that function). So I thought I would check
with the list.
A p-adic matrix will include an integer matrix of values. S
So, I'm trying to learn how to write Pyrex code. So far, I've been able to
fit some functions into existing files, but creating new files and modules
to Sage has been difficult...
I'm moving polynomials to sage.rings.polynomial because there are getting to
be a fair number of files for polynomial
Hey,
I've been looking into changing RR.random_element and RDF.random_element to
do something more sensible than create a random integer in the range -2 to 2
and coerce it into the reals. The reasonable thing to do for RDF seems to be
to use GSL, create a RealDistribution and then return a random e
On 4/12/07, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I just took a look at the Python 3000 PEP. A couple of points where
> things due to be phased out are commonly used in SAGE:
> -- raise ValueError, "That number shouldn't be zero" -- now illegal
> -- rai
I also have a patch for RDF.random_element. I've pasted it in below for
comparison to ideas other people have. The interface is still incomplete (I
wrote it in 5 minutes): I want to eventually provide an interface to all of
the probability distributions that GSL offers.
def random_element(se
In the course of thinking about coercion for p-adic rings, fields and
extensions, I've had some ideas about a different kind of coercion model to
use for SAGE. It would fit into the existing coercion model, though I can
see it motivating changes to the existing model.
SAGE currently does quite we
manually cast an element of a RealCompletionField
into RR. Similarly for ComplexCompletionField (I suppose I choose one of
the conjugate embeddings arbitrarily) and pAdicCompletionField.
David
On 4/26/07, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In the course of thinking about coercion for
braic
topology? I hear that Singular has a library for doing ext and tor, etc (I
think it's called homolog_lib).
David
On 4/26/07, David Roe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In the course of thinking about coercion for p-adic rings, fields and
> extensions, I've had some i
it get created? Would every ring, on
> creation time, try and update the commutative diagram to include
> itself? The more I think about it, the more having the (cached)
> has_coerce_map_from() function return an actual homomorphism (or
> None) seems to make sense. Thus one would traver
I'd be happy to do it. Having just read through the code, it looks like it
shouldn't be hard, with the following potential hangups:
Does SAGE have Tamagawa numbers, Kodaira symbols and minimal models for
elliptic curves?
I need to think a bit about the syntax for completions of number fields at
pr
>
> >> I think the square_root
> >> function should take a parameter to distinguish between the three
> >> types (with default 2? One can always do sqrt(2.0) or RR(sqrt(2)),
> >> etc. and I don't think causal users would be confused by \sqrt{2} as
> >> an answer). One could have actual functions fo
To some extent I agree. I think what pushed me to the other side is that if
you're having to use an index such an object in the first place, you already
have had to put the effort into learning that package. And for those people
who know the package well and not SAGE well, preserving the native i
> 1) I started moving desolvers.py into
SAGEHOME/devel/sage-main/build/sage/calculus/. Is this the appropriate
place?
Seems like a good place to me.
> 2) You use "Integer(i)" instead of just "i", which seems unnecessary. I
changed all of these, but I am wondering why they were as they were.
The
I have to agree with Martin here. And I'm worried that if we get a
journalist involved, they won't be willing to include exactly what we want.
The general readership of a newspaper is not going to be very interested
that SAGE includes Python, GP/Pari, Maxima, Singular,
I also think that the t
I may be implementing something like this for p-adics soon. It's one of the
options for doing gcds meaningfully. If anyone else is interested in
working on this, get in touch with me.
David
On 5/17/07, Michel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> It is rather frustrating that sage does not a have a g
These are all basically examples of sections of injective canonical maps
going the other direction. There clearly shouldn't be a coerce method going
that direction because the objects are not isomorphic. If we switch to a
data-driven, category theoretic coercion system, it should be possible to
r
I hate significant figures. Use real error propogation and standard
deviations instead.
David
On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 22 May 2007, David Harvey wrote:
>
> >> 1*meters + 2*meters*meters : NOT OK.
> >> 1*meters + 2*feet = ... in feet or m
> Another big issue with asymptote is that I think it fundamentally depends
> on latex. Latex doesn't come pre-installed in OS X or most Linux
> installs,
> though of course it is easy to install in Linux. So far SAGE has got
> quite
> far with almost no dependencies -- latex is a pretty big dep
ts/numbertheory/number_fields
David Roe
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-d
Sorry I didn't reply earlier.
Implementing an is_symmetric function for matrices sounds like a good idea.
But I think it should go in the base class: something like
def is_symmetric(self):
if self.ncols != self.nrows:
return False
cdef int i, j:
for i from 1 <= i < self.nrows:
I would agree on the little endian-ness. The lists of digits coming from
p-adics (and printing in series mode) is little-endian. It would be nice to
be consistent with this. I also agree with David Harvey's arguments.
David
On 6/29/07, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jun 29,
Hey all,
I ran into a problem saving a graph to postscript recently. Here's what I
did:
plot.options['plot_division'] = 4
plot.options['plot_points'] = 2
P=plot(sin(5/(x)), x,0,1)
P.save('filename.eps', xmin = -.25, xmax = 1)
Attempting to open the resulting file on my MacBook Pro with e
1 - 100 of 922 matches
Mail list logo
