On May 6, 7.10pm, William Stein wrote:
>Crap. Thanks for spotting this. Fortunately this is used in only
> one place in Sage; this one line in congroup_gamma0.py:
>
> return [GammaH(N, H) for H in R.multiplicative_subgroups()]
Yes, that was how I noticed this -- my fix for 5250 caused
mu
lliam Stein :
>
> >> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 11:33 AM, davidloeffler
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> On May 6, 7.10pm, William Stein wrote:
> >>>>Crap. Thanks for spotting this. Fortunately this is used in only
> >>>> one pla
Can I use this opportunity to request some reviews for modular forms
patches? I decided I'd spend a few afternoons squashing as many easy
modular forms buglets as I could, with the result that there is now a
bunch of tickets that are "[with patch, needs review]". It would be
cool to get some of th
At the end of the compilation, when it generates the reference manual,
I'm getting a huge bunch of warning messages from the Sphinx parser.
These are due to badly formatted ReST docstrings. I've opened a ticket
(#6149) and uploaded a patch -- any volunteers to review this? It
would look a bit unpr
On May 28, 7:00 pm, John Cremona wrote:
> 2009/5/28 Marshall Hampton :
>
>
>
> > I had the same two numerical noise type failures in matrix2.pyx and
> > expression.pyx, on an intel mac running 10.5. Those were the only
> > failures.
>
> Same here on ubiuntu 32-bit.
>
> John
Same for me (SuSE 32
\begin{grumble}
For me, 4.0.1.alpha0 builds successfully on 32-bit Linux (upgrading
from 4.0). But there are a bunch of errors building the reference
manual, coming from sage.combinat.backtrack.SearchForest. This is
rather frustrating given the hours of work I put in to making sure the
4.0 docs b
On Jun 2, 4:35 pm, kcrisman wrote:
>
> Though I'll point out, for the sake of argument, that some of us have
> such underpowered computers that even running full doctests is not
> practical (i.e. everything times out), and given how long it takes to
> build the documentation whenever I even upgra
On Jun 6, 3:47 am, William Stein wrote:
> * Galois theory and ramification groups for p-adic extensions (needs
> the previous features)
I wrote a (very simplistic) implementation of Artin symbols and
decomposition and ramification groups a few months back for extensions
of *number fields*
Can I make a special request for this release? It would be really nice
if we could get rid of the insufferable "WARNING: html_favicon is not
an .ico file" on building the documentation. Inspection reveals that
the favicon is set to "output/html/en/blah/_static/sageicon.png",
which is not an .ico f
On Jun 8, 1:05 pm, William Stein wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, if you do "sage -upgrade" again, does it build
> the documentation yet again?
>
> William
Yes, it does.
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
Is there a copy anywhere we can use with sage -upgrade?
David
On Jun 15, 9:13 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here's Sage 4.0.2.rc0. Come and get it while it's hot:
>
> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/ncalexan/releases
>
> We merged all of the tickets with positive review on trac
On Jun 16, 2:15 am, Nick Alexander wrote:
> On 15-Jun-09, at 4:22 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> > "Someone didn't format their reST correctly, so building the reference
> > manual now produces warnings/errors."
>
> Has the reference manual ever built correctly? (I always get tons of
> noi
I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.spkg. Is this deliberate?
The former failed to build for lots of people (including me).
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
Wow, that's a fast release cycle :-)
On Jun 16, 12:34 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:28 PM, davidloeffler
> wrote:
>
> > I notice that you still have libm4ri-20090512.spkg in this version,
> > rather than malb's updated libm4ri-20090615.s
I've got a build running on my laptop at the moment, and I was
wondering: why does the install script not run the Flint test suite?
I'm puzzled by this since it did run Flint tests when I installed
4.0.2, which was actually the same Flint spkg version
(flint-1.3.0.p1.spkg)
David
--~--~-~-
On Jun 27, 8:43 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> #6418: John Palmieri: ref manual fixes for 4.1.alpha1 [Reviewed by
> Minh Van Nguyen]
\begin{pedantry}
We're going to need another reference-manual-fixing ticket, as there
are three documentation build warnings in this alpha2. Two of these
are from the n
On SuSE, 32-bit, sage -testall -long passes except for errors in the
same three files Jaap reported above (and a harmless timeout in
elliptic curves).
Craig: thanks for pointing out SAGE_CHECK. But it strikes me that
there is no way I can run those tests now, without recompiling the
corresponding
On Jun 27, 11:54 pm, davidloeffler wrote:
> On SuSE, 32-bit, sage -testall -long passes except for errors in the
> same three files Jaap reported above (and a harmless timeout in
> elliptic curves).
I spoke too soon. Something rather harmful has in fact happened: the
wrong patches
I got the same thing; and when I added a single quote in the obvious
place, I got a new error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/david/sage-4.1/local/bin/sage-apply-ticket", line 20, in
import sage.misc.hg as hg
File "/home/david/sage-4.1/devel/sage-unflaking/sage/misc/hg.py
This is now #6462.
(I have played with it a bit myself, and I can get pickling and
unpickling to work, by defining a __reduce__ function for orders, and
adjusting the __reduce__ function for number field elements; but now
the standard x == loads(dumps(x)) test doesn't seem to work.)
David
On Ju
with the line numbers for the first!
David
On Jul 4, 12:46 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 1:25 PM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> > This is now #6462.
>
> > (I have played with it a bit myself, and I can get pickling and
> > unpickling to work, by de
Patch is now up at: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6462
David
On Jul 4, 2:14 pm, davidloeffler wrote:
> It is indeed a bit strange that OrderElement derives from
> FieldElement. But my diagnosis was different: Parent classes that have
> attributes which are Elements cause
On Jul 9, 9:02 am, Pat LeSmithe wrote:
> Minh Nguyen wrote:
> > Note that I have already deleted the experimental repository sage-exp,
> > but the documentation build script (I think) still links to or uses
> > that deleted repository. This might be due to ticket #5350
>
> >http://trac.sagemath.
On Jul 13, 8:24 am, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> As it now stands, the HTML version of the reference manual of Sage
> 4.1.1 is bit broken. You can build the HTML version. However, if the
> docstring for a function or class uses the ".. MATH::" tag, then it
> won't render in the generated HTML version.
On Jul 13, 10:59 pm, Jaap Spies wrote:
> I think the documentation build system needs some polishing.
It's not really the fault of the documentation build system; it's the
upgrade and clone scripts that are at fault. In particular, the
decision to use hard links for the documentation build sy
> Could someone point me to a reason why anything should be printed as
> 1.*var?
To remind you that the computation you're doing is only correct to 8
decimal places? If you want exact computations you shouldn't be using
the real field as base.
David
--~--~-~--~~
I'm seeing some errors building the reference manual, from sage/
schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py and sage/databases/
jones.py. Presumably these are coming from the tickets
#6045: Robert Bradshaw: Computation of Heegner points [Reviewed by
John Cremona, Minh Van Nguyen]
#6332: Franci
On Jul 21, 10:56 am, davidloeffler wrote:
> I'm seeing some errors building the reference manual, from sage/
> schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_rational_field.py and sage/databases/
> jones.py. Presumably these are coming from the tickets
>
> #6045: Robert Bradshaw: Computati
This is an ID10T error. The following assertion from the bug report is
false:
> The prime 83 splits as PQ, where
> P, Q have N(P)=83^5.
sage: [P.residue_class_degree() for P in M.primes_above(83)]
[1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1]
So the output is correct.
David
On Aug 17, 10:41 am, Harald Schi
Building on 64-bit SuSE with SAGE_CHECK="yes" failed at libgcrypt,
with a bunch of errors in the gcrypt test script:
make[4]: Entering directory `/home/david/sage-4.1.2.rc0/spkg/build/
libgcrypt-1.4.3.p2/src/tests'
version:1.4.0:
ciphers:arcfour:blowfish:cast5:des:aes:twofish:serpent:rfc2268:seed
I will give it a try once the current build has finished.
David
On Oct 1, 12:39 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:36 PM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> > Building on 64-bit SuSE with SAGE_CHECK="yes" failed at libgcrypt,
> > with a
I've come up with another error. This is the first time I've built
with SAGE_CHECK set, so it's running all the test suites in all the
packages, and quaddouble fails:
Successfully installed quaddouble-2.2.p9
Running the test suite.
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/david/sage-4.1.2.rc0/spkg/buil
On Oct 1, 4:15 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:47 AM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> > I've come up with another error. This is the first time I've built
> > with SAGE_CHECK set, so it's running all the test suites in all the
> > packa
On Oct 1, 12:39 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:36 PM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> > Building on 64-bit SuSE with SAGE_CHECK="yes" failed at libgcrypt,
> > with a bunch of errors in the gcrypt test script:
>
> Can you try us
On Oct 1, 4:28 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 8:23 AM, davidloeffler wrote:
>
> > On Oct 1, 4:15 pm, William Stein wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:47 AM, davidloeffler
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > I've come up wit
On Oct 4, 4:54 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Rob Beezer wrote:
>
> > On Oct 3, 6:05 pm, William Stein wrote:
> >> And this has already been almost completed by David Loeffler based
> >> on work by me. http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6449
>
> > The work
Sorry, I've just seen William's earlier post in this thread, and I see
that there was no need for my rather combative previous post -- I
apologise for any offence I may have caused.
David
On Oct 4, 2:05 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:30 PM, David Joyner wrote:
>
> > The ab
There seem to be *hundreds* of files missing from the new reference
manual. I did a grep:
da...@groke:~/sage-3.4.rc0/devel/sage-main/sage> grep "EXAMPL.*[^:]:$"
-lr *
to pick up files that contained "EXAMPLES:" with a single colon rather
than a double one, and it turned up no fewer than 510 file
I also came across the problem with quaternion_order_ideal.py, but for
me it went away when I re-built from a clean tarball (rather than
upgrading from 3.4.rc0 as I had done before). But even the final 3.4
tarball generates some Sphinx error messages when you do a docbuild,
from some slightly mis-
I think I'm being credited with more than my fair share of reviewing
here:
> #2551: Francis Clarke: __getitem__ for relative number field elements
> is ... surprising [Reviewed by John Cremona, David Loeffler]
> #5214: Francis Clarke: coercion to orders in relative number fields is
> not implemen
On Mar 30, 8:24 pm, Christophe Oosterlynck wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Consider matrices containing univariate polynomials over GF(2): is it
> normal that calculating the smith normal form for such a matrix is
> extremely slow?
I wrote the smith_form code, and it's completely generic, applying to
an arbitr
On Mar 31, 2:19 pm, John Cremona wrote:
> It works fine for me with an absolute path!
>
> John
>
Me too. Thanks for the workaround, Georg!
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group
On Apr 9, 9:45 am, William Stein wrote:
>
> I hope those of you who feel qualified to write doctests, will help
> out. It's nearly impossible for one person to do all 1900 of those
> doctests in the next month. Writing doctests is not easy and it
> absolutely requires experience experience wi
Never mind -- I remembered the existence of "sage -t -verbose" and
found the problem. (It was because I had a comment in my file
containing an unmatched opening triple quote -- this somehow throws
out the doctest script's parser.)
David
On Apr 10, 12:03 pm, daveloeffler wrote:
> I've been worki
On Apr 16, 9:02 pm, Jaap Spies wrote:
> On Fedora 9, 32 bit, after an upgrade:
>
> The following tests failed:
>
> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/modular/dirichlet.py"
> sage -t "devel/sage/sage/misc/sagedoc.py"
On 32bit SuSE Linux, upgrading from 3.4.1.rc2, I also get the
dirichlet
45 matches
Mail list logo
