[sage-devel] Re: problems with hypergeometric and maxima_calculus.hgfpoly

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 12:35:50 PM UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > there is quite a bit of weirdness mentioned here: > > http://ask.sagemath.org/question/24257/a-hypergeometric-series/ > > e.g. > > sage: hypergeometric([-2,-1],[2],-1).n(100) > --

Re: [sage-devel] Re: problems with hypergeometric and maxima_calculus.hgfpoly

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:02 AM, kcrisman wrote: >> For Sage, fixing the problem is actually trivial: when the hypergeometric >> function is a polynomial (and at least when the inputs are exact), don't >> call mpmath; just evaluate the polynomial directly and then call .n() on the >> result. >> >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: problems with hypergeometric and maxima_calculus.hgfpoly

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:51 PM, kcrisman wrote: >> >> For Sage, fixing the problem is actually trivial: when the >> >> hypergeometric >> >> function is a polynomial (and at least when the inputs are exact), >> >> don't >> >> call mpmath; just evaluate the polynomial directly and then call .n() >>

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Why I don't think Sage has "failed" as a replacement for Maple, Mathematica and other Ma*'s

On Sunday, September 28, 2014 1:00:42 AM UTC+2, rjf wrote: > > > > On Saturday, September 27, 2014 1:21:28 PM UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote: >> >> I guess you are really happy about python3, then. >> >> $ python3 >> Python 3.4.1 (default, Sep 7 2014, 11:02:45) >> [GCC 4.9.1 20140813 (Red Hat 4.9.1-7)

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On Tuesday, November 11, 2014 12:21:12 AM UTC+1, William wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Ursula Whitcher > wrote: > > On 11/5/2014 8:24 AM, William Stein wrote: > > > >> * By "we write up" above, I mean you write up something very, very > >> rough, post it here, and get feedback.

[sage-devel] Re: 2x2 integer matrices

On Sunday, November 16, 2014 5:45:01 AM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote: > > Hello, > > We currently have two much implementation of 2x2 matrices. I found at > least three that leads to distinct element classes > > sage: M1 = SL2Z > sage: M2 = MatrixSpace(ZZ,2) > sage: from sage.matrix.matrix_intege

Re: [sage-devel] Re: 2x2 integer matrices

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2014-11-16 5:42 UTC−07:00, Fredrik Johansson : >> >> >> On Sunday, November 16, 2014 5:45:01 AM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>&g

[sage-devel] Re: Recurrences and Sequence Formula Guessing Functions in Sage

On Saturday, November 19, 2016 at 4:56:42 PM UTC+1, Maxie Schmidt wrote: > > Hello, > > I have been working back and forth between Sage and Mathematica for a > while now trying to learn how to use Sage to replace Mathematica's core > functionality in my day to day use of it. One of the (sets o

[sage-devel] Re: algebraic number package?

On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 3:20:00 PM UTC+2, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > Hello, > > The qqbar source does not use a lower-level library. My question: > is there a stand-alone open-source fast version of such a package? > Reason I'm asking is linkage with Pynac. > > Regards, > There are immediate plans

[sage-devel] Fast multivariate polynomial arithmetic in Flint

Hi all, Bill Hart has a nice writeup about the upcoming support for multivariate polynomial arithmetic in Flint, which is being developed as part of OpenDreamKit. https://wbhart.blogspot.fr/2017/07/update-on-fast-multivariate-polynomial.html Fredrik -- You received this message because you a

Re: [sage-devel] Re: gamma function enhancement proposal

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 9:01 PM, William Stein wrote: > Hi Buck, > > I asked Mike Rubinstein, who has implemented the incomplete Gamma > function in various situations (e.g., I think he did the first ever > open source implementation that was general enough for me to use for > my research), writte

Re: [sage-devel] Re: gamma function enhancement proposal

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Buck Evan wrote: > Fredrik: > Thank you for your thoughtful reply! > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 2:48 PM Fredrik Johansson > wrote: >> >> Arb (which is now in Sage) permits computing incomplete gamma >> functions with rigorous erro

Re: [sage-devel] zero division

On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 6:04:49 PM UTC+1, William wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Thierry > > wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 08:17:43AM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > >> On 2016-03-09 23:56, Thierry wrote: > >> >Willing to > >> >change the behaviour will be similar to

Re: [sage-devel] zero division

On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 3:50:21 PM UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote: > > On Thursday, March 10, 2016 at 8:17:47 AM UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: >> >> RR represents the real numbers > > > IMHO we should be very careful to never ever say that. > > RR is floating point arithmetic which is a useful ap

[sage-devel] Re: What is the determinant of a 0x0 matrix

On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 4:31:04 AM UTC+1, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > > Hey all, >We ended up needing to compute the determinant of a 0x0 matrix in > #17030.Sage currently says the following: > > sage: mat = matrix(ZZ, 0, 0) > sage: mat.det() > 1 > > However, the code (and myself) was exp

Re: [sage-devel] Code vs codes

On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 9:34:13 AM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:11 AM, William Stein > wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Kwankyu Lee > wrote: > >> Which one is correct? > >> > >> (1) "This is based on code by A and B" > >> (2) "This is based on codes

[sage-devel] Re: SAGE 8.1 will not compile under Ubuntu 17.10: error installing giac-1.2.3.47.p0

On Thursday, February 15, 2018 at 9:43:46 PM UTC+1, Harald Helfgott wrote: > > I have just updated Ubuntu 17.04 to 17.10 (since version 17.04 reached its > end-of-life point). Sage was uninstalled in the process. The binary I > reinstalled from the standard repositories crashed, so the only optio

[sage-devel] Re: What are we unable to do right now ?

On Friday, December 5, 2014 8:17:44 AM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > Helloo everybody ! > > I am preparing some Sage talk, and I wanted to say at some point: > "Honestly we are not that good. We have strong points but we miss many > things too. It all depends on what the developpers are int

Re: [sage-devel] Re: What are we unable to do right now ?

On Friday, December 5, 2014 1:08:14 PM UTC+1, Jori Mantysalo wrote: > > > Having documentation arranged by technical implementation is also bad. > Having TESTS-section shown for normal user is bad. Having is_lattice() on > different page that is_meet_semilattice() is bad. > Seconding this. Mix

[sage-devel] Re: Slow coercion from Sparse Polynomial Ring over ZZ to Dense Polynomial Ring using FLINT

On Saturday, December 13, 2014 4:05:09 PM UTC+1, Bruno Grenet wrote: > > Working on ticket #15790 ,¹ I've > noticed that coercion from Sparse Polynomial Ring over ZZ to Dense > Polynomial over ZZ with FLINT implementation is unexpectedly slow. It is > n

Re: [sage-devel] What are we unable to do right now ?

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:20 AM, rjf wrote: > > Well, you could assert that there is no discussion, but you are apparently > wrong. > sqrt has 2 values except at zero. (in the complex plane, or on the real > line). > > for example, sqrt(9) is the set {-3,3} . That is how it is extended. > and

[sage-devel] Re: Isolating a root of a polynomial

On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 12:14:09 PM UTC+1, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > Hello sage-devel, > > I am wondering if there is an algorithm implemented in Sage which can > isolate a complex root of a given polynomial? > > The typical use case is that I have a polynomial for which I know one > ap

[sage-devel] Re: Isolating a root of a polynomial

On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 6:30:06 PM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > > >> I'm still looking for a good converse of Henrici's 6.4g for (2). In the >> real case, it is sufficient to test that f'(x) != 0 for all x in the >> interval (just a single polynomial evaluation using interval arithmetic). >> Is

Re: [sage-devel] cross-post from flint-devel: python bindings for Flint and Arb (work in progress)

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:19 PM, William Stein wrote: > On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:56 AM, John Cremona wrote: >> http://fredrikj.net/blog/2015/01/arb-and-flint-in-python/ > > Hi Fredrik, > > Any chance you could make this trivial to install into an existing > Sage install? E.g. a sage package? Si

[sage-devel] Re: Sage is grown up; needs a last name

On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 1:13:46 PM UTC+1, William wrote: > > Hi Sage Developers, > > Several people and events have suggested to me that the official name > of "Sage" should be filled out to be "SageMath", like the website url > (which is sagemath.org and has been since I bought it in

[sage-devel] Re: symbolic series help needed

On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 10:57:35 AM UTC+2, Simon King wrote: > > Hi Ralf, > > On 2015-04-01, Ralf Stephan > wrote: > > Symbolic series is what the user often encounters first when looking in > > Sage for power series. > > I disagree with that statement. A user who wants to know how to do

Re: [sage-devel] Arb as a standard package?

On Friday, May 29, 2015 at 12:23:29 PM UTC-4, vdelecroix wrote: > > On 29/05/15 17:46, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: > > Fredrik Johansson's "Arb" library hasn't been an optional package for a > > full year yet, but Volker already suggested fast-tracking it to standard > > a while ago[1], and the (few)

[sage-devel] Arb 2.23 available

Hi all, I have released Arb 2.23.0 which features a lot of performance improvements and some new functions. A longer writeup is available here: https://fredrikj.net/blog/2022/06/arb-2-23-released/ Best, Fredrik -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage

[sage-devel] Re: On changing Bernoulli(1) to +½

(https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.06743 > ). > > I thought I was also done with changing B_1 = +½ for SageMath, but then > someone pointed out that the latter currently uses other libraries that all > have B_1 = -½. I have already opened a PR for one such library, FLINT, to > change B_1 =

Re: [sage-devel] VOTE: move Sage development to Github

+1 for GitHub On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 8:30:16 PM UTC+2 de...@benjamin-hackl.at wrote: > +1 for GitHub. > > > > On 21.09.2022, at 19:23, David Roe wrote: > > Dear Sage developers, > Following extensive discussion, both recently >

[sage-devel] Re: Is this a bug?

On Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 5:29:41 AM UTC+2 Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > No, it is not. The generic fraction field can only reduce something up to > a unit since the gcd is defined up to a unit. I agree it looks funny, but I > don't see a sensible way to code to get a negative sign in the n

[sage-devel] ANN: FLINT workshop October 9-13 in Kaiserslautern

Hi all, There will be a FLINT development meeting in Kaiserslautern, Germany, the week October 9-13, 2023. More details will be available on the following website: https://flintlib.github.io/workshop2023.html The workshop will focus on coding sprints to improve FLINT and its integration in other

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Transpiling from Mathematica syntax to sage backends

I will just mention http://fungrim.org/grim/ which is somewhat related to the present discussion. This is an attempt to design a symbolic formula language that is easy to parse and has well-defined semantics. Key points: * Can be used within Python (and other languages) without special syntax *

[sage-devel] Re: "Real Field" -> "Real Floating-point Field"

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 2:09:05 AM UTC+2 emanuel.c...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> To the backward compatibility >> reasons others have mentioned, I would add that for many people, "real >> numbers" in a "computational" context *does* mean floating-point >> numbers! >> > > That's a bad (f

Re: [sage-devel] Re: "Real Field" -> "Real Floating-point Field"

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 8:38 AM Kwankyu Lee wrote: > Currently working on that (see http://fredrikj.net/calcium/ and >> http://fredrikj.net/blog/2020/09/benchmarking-exact-dft-computation/). >> > > Looks great! The standard question is then: do you think your library fits > for the throne of Real

[sage-devel] QQbar benchmarks

Hi all, I'm looking for benchmark problems for QQbar/AA arithmetic. Ideally such a problem will: * Be reducible to a short program that, apart from using QQbar/AA operations, is reasonably self-contained. * Reflect real-world use, i.e. originate from using Sage to solve an actual mathematical pro

Re: [sage-devel] QQbar benchmarks

Hi Vincent, On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 4:26:18 PM UTC+2 vdelecroix wrote: > Dear Fredrik, > > One technical question: I thought that your ca_t implementation > used multivariate polynomials. This is what Magma does but not > what sage does. The latter uses expression trees and take union >

Re: [sage-devel] QQbar benchmarks

On Sunday, April 25, 2021 at 4:26:18 PM UTC+2 vdelecroix wrote: > Dear Fredrik, > > One technical question: I thought that your ca_t implementation > used multivariate polynomials. This is what Magma does but not > what sage does. The latter uses expression trees and take union > fields anytim

[sage-devel] FLINT workshop March 18-22 in Bordeaux

Hi all, We will have a meeting for FLINT development March 18 - 22, 2024 in Bordeaux, following up last year's very successful workshop in Kaiserslautern. Planned projects include: * Performance tuning * Integration in other software (SageMath, Oscar, python-flint, SymPy, etc.) * Numerical and e

<    1   2