On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Martin Rubey
wrote:
> William Stein writes:
>
>> 2010/1/27 Jaakko Seppälä :
>>> True. I was just thinking that why Sage won't use the law of
>>> congruences to evaluate the expression. 84977118993*2^520+1 is not too
>>> large number to fit into the memory. Therefo
William Stein writes:
> 2010/1/27 Jaakko Seppälä :
>> True. I was just thinking that why Sage won't use the law of
>> congruences to evaluate the expression. 84977118993*2^520+1 is not too
>> large number to fit into the memory. Therefore one can use laws of
>> congruences to evaluate mod(2^(2^51
Hi Gokhan,
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Gokhan Sever wrote:
> Brian mentions of building in 20 different OS'es in parallel. Is there
> a such automated build-farm for the SAGE that could be accessible
> through the WEB --showing the results of builds?
See William Stein's development direc
On Jan 27, 5:52 pm, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi Gokhan,
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Gokhan Sever wrote:
>
>
>
> > Is there a way to specify in SAGE to use its own version of
> > matplotlibrc. And why this is not the default option?
>
> Ticket #6235
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/
Update: No, the 10.5 version does not appear to work (Bad CPU type
error).
On Jan 28, 12:48 am, Andri Egilsson wrote:
> > Why don't you use the 10.5 version?
>
> Well, I assumed that the 10.5 version was only for 64 bit systems (the
> filename is "sage-4.3.1-OSX-10.5-i386-64bit-i386-Darwin.dmg")
> Why don't you use the 10.5 version?
Well, I assumed that the 10.5 version was only for 64 bit systems (the
filename is "sage-4.3.1-OSX-10.5-i386-64bit-i386-Darwin.dmg") but now
that you mention it, it can be construed as being for i386 _and_ 64bit-
i386, so I'll try that.
Best,
Andri
> > To
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Andri Egilsson
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the same problem as David Galant. I am running Mac OS X 10.6.2
> on a MacBook Pro 2.16 GHz Core Duo and installed from the file named
> "sage-4.3.1-OSX-10.6-i386-Darwin.dmg" (I received the "Bad CPU type in
> executable" error
Hi,
I have the same problem as David Galant. I am running Mac OS X 10.6.2
on a MacBook Pro 2.16 GHz Core Duo and installed from the file named
"sage-4.3.1-OSX-10.6-i386-Darwin.dmg" (I received the "Bad CPU type in
executable" error). I guess I have to build from source or use the
10.4 version (tho
Hi Gokhan,
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Gokhan Sever wrote:
> Is there a way to specify in SAGE to use its own version of
> matplotlibrc. And why this is not the default option?
Ticket #6235
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6235
tracks this issue.
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
On Jan 27, 3:29 pm, marktmueller wrote:
> OK -- I read some of the later comments and I think the solution is to
> download an earlier version of Sage compatible with OSX 10.5.8
It doesn't have to be an earlier version of Sage. The downloads page
that I see lists
sage-4.3.1-OSX-10.5-i386-64bit-
OK -- I read some of the later comments and I think the solution is to
download an earlier version of Sage compatible with OSX 10.5.8
On Jan 24, 5:39 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> Do you know which exactbinaryyou downloaded?
>
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Mark Mueller wrote:
>
>
>
> > I install
I downloaded from http://www.sagemath.org/ and just followed the
obvious download link, selecting binary. Am I missing something
obvious?
On Jan 24, 5:39 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> Do you know which exactbinaryyou downloaded?
>
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 2:02 PM, Mark Mueller wrote:
>
>
>
> > I in
Hello,
I am testing at a local build of 4.3.2.alpha0 at my Fedora 12. Sage
seems like using my local matplotlibrc file while I am trying to plot
something using matplotlib, and resulting with import error for my
defauly Qt4Agg backend.
Is there a way to specify in SAGE to use its own version of
m
2010/1/27 Jaakko Seppälä :
> True. I was just thinking that why Sage won't use the law of
> congruences to evaluate the expression. 84977118993*2^520+1 is not too
> large number to fit into the memory. Therefore one can use laws of
> congruences to evaluate mod(2^(2^517)+1,84977118993*2^520+1).
No
Jaakko Seppälä writes:
> True. I was just thinking that why Sage won't use the law of
> congruences to evaluate the expression. 84977118993*2^520+1 is not too
> large number to fit into the memory. Therefore one can use laws of
> congruences to evaluate mod(2^(2^517)+1,84977118993*2^520+1).
This
True. I was just thinking that why Sage won't use the law of
congruences to evaluate the expression. 84977118993*2^520+1 is not too
large number to fit into the memory. Therefore one can use laws of
congruences to evaluate mod(2^(2^517)+1,84977118993*2^520+1).
On Jan 27, 5:21 pm, Marshall Hampton
this worked wonderfully . thanks a lot Minh!
/staffan
On Jan 26, 8:16 pm, staffan wrote:
> thanks a lot ! i just installed gfortran and am doing the build again
> right now.
> i will inform later if it is working correctly on Mepis 8 .
>
> regards,
>
> Staffan
>
> On Jan 26, 5:56 pm, Minh Nguyen
The _result_ can certainly be verified by Sage somehow. But to
directly manipulate the expansion of something like 2^(2^517)+1 would
be impossible, so care is needed in how to represent it. In base 10,
for example, that number has about 10^155 digits. Given that there
are roughly 10^52 electrons
On Jan 27, 12:21 am, Harald Schilly wrote:
>
> Please install libgfortran.so.3. It belongs to libgfortran3 which is
> part of gfortran.
> i.e.
> $ sudo apt-get install gfortran
Thanks, this appears to have solved the problem.
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.c
> I found onhttp://www.prothsearch.net/fermat.htmlthat 84977118993*2^
> {520} + 1 | 2^{2^517}+1. Can this result be verified by Sage?
sage: mod(2,84977118993*2^520+1)^(2^517)+1
0
Regards,
/Håkan
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gro
I found on http://www.prothsearch.net/fermat.html that 84977118993*2^
{520} + 1 | 2^{2^517}+1. Can this result be verified by Sage?
sage: mod(2^(2^517)+1,84977118993*2^520+1)
---
RuntimeError Trace
Dear all,
Before the switch to Pynac, it was possible to access parts of
expressions by indexing, e.g.
f = x^3 + 2*x^2 + 3*x
f[0]
x^3
Now I get the error message
TypeError: 'sage.symbolic.expression.Expression' object does not
support
indexing
Below, I pasted an example how Burcin wanted to impl
22 matches
Mail list logo
