r 5, 2019 at 1:43:23 AM UTC-8, Robert Samal wrote:
>
> I noticed the following strange behavior of
> graph6_string()/sparse6_string() functions of graphs:
>
> sage: K2=graphs.CompleteGraph(2)
> sage: P=K2.cartesian_product(K2)
>
> sage: print(P.sparse6_string())
> sage
I noticed the following strange behavior of
graph6_string()/sparse6_string() functions of graphs:
sage: K2=graphs.CompleteGraph(2)
sage: P=K2.cartesian_product(K2)
sage: print(P.sparse6_string())
sage: print(Graph(P.graph6_string()).sparse6_string())
:CoKN
:Cci
To explain: I understand, that
I observed the following weird behavior of the symbolic engine.
sage: x/x
1
sage: x^2/x
x
sage: (x^2+x)/x
(x^2 + x)/x
sage: assume(x>0)
sage: assume(x,'real')
sage: assumptions()
[x > 0, x is real]
sage: (x^2+x)/x
(x^2 + x)/x
To clarify: first, I consider the first two simplifications slightly
Indeed it works in Sage 8.4.
Thanks!
On Wednesday, October 9, 2019 at 8:34:41 AM UTC-7, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> This got broken in Sage 8.5.
> (still works in 8.4)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:09 AM David Joyner > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed,
Sorry, F=GF(3), I made my original example shorter and didn't read it
properly.
So the full problematic code is
B=matrix(GF(3), 2,2,[1,0,1,0], sparse=True)
v=vector(GF(3), [1,1])
B.solve_right(v)
Thanks,
Robert
On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 5:17:59 PM UTC-7, Robert Samal wrote:
>
I am trying to solve a rather large linear systems of equations of GF(3).
As the matrices are sparse, I thought that adding "sparse=True" to the
constructor of the matrix could be of help. However, I ran to a strange
error message.
B=matrix(GF(3), 2,2,[1,0,1,0], sparse=True)
v=vector(F, [1,1])
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com.
V
/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgpg-error.so.0
(0x7f627fec5000)
On Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 6:38:53 PM UTC+1, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Can you tell us more about what eog links to?
>
> $ sage -sh command -v eog
> /usr/bin/eog
> $ sage -sh ldd /usr/bin/eog # adjust p
Hi,
I'm trying to compute something using multivariate polynomials, and am
struggling to understand the relation between polynomials of type
and of type .
How does one create one or the other? And, mainly: how can one convert from
one to the other?
What happened to me is that I unwillingl
Thanks John!
Your suggestion
sage: p.solver_parameter("simplex_or_intopt", "simplex_then_intopt")
>
Works nicely also on sage v5.2.
It would be worth to document it though.
p.solve? doesn't mention anything (p = MixedIntegerLinearProgram() ),
p.solver_parameter says that GLPK specific pa
me official way how to distinguish these two cases?
I suppose I could use cvxopt, but I fear it would be too slow for the real
program I want to use it for.
Thanks in advance,
Robert Samal
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support&qu
Hi!
By some random experiments I discovered the following weirdness:
sage: bool(piInfinity)
True
So far it seems that pi < Infinity is the only misbehaving comparison:
sage: bool(pi<2*pi)
True
sage: bool(2*pihttp://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
Thanks a lot, Dmitrii!
It works for me now. (Actually for quite some time, but now I can happily
report, that
compared to cvxopt that I was using before, using csdp is about 10-times
faster!)
I didn't know about sage -sh , that is a very useful trick (perhaps it
should
be documented more, or
ently sage
disagrees. Who is right? :-)
What can I do to get the solution automatically, without substituting tan
manually?
Thanks,
Robert Samal
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegrou
>
> Can you post the logs from doing sage -python setup.py instasll, as well
> as explicit instructions (where to download, etc.) for how to duplicate
> the error?
>
Sure. It's rather long, but I suppose if it works it would be useful for
other people, too. I was hoping someone could spot the p
lapack etc.)
Is there some different way to call python programs from sage, that
wouldn't need to go through this?
Any ideas are appreciated, thanks for reading this,
Robert Samal
P.S. I'm using
Sage Version 4.8, Release Date: 2012-01-20
Speaking about solve(), is there a place to report equations it cannot
solve
(and I believe it should?).
I suppose putting it on the same Trac ticket is wrong practice? But
should
it be another ticket, or some yet other place?
Robert
> Yup. solve() probably needs a general overhaul (and has for
The ticket is here:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10124
> I see these sorts of issues too. Can you open a ticket for this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubsc
I observed that solve behaves inconsistently in the following regards:
sage: solve([x==1,x==-1],x)
[]
(this is as expected)
However:
solve([x==1,x==-1],x, solution_dict=True)
produces an error message. Easy to live with, but I was scared when I
first saw it :-).
It should be easy to correct, a
The following code should produce a drawing of the
Frucht graph with edges labeled 0 upto 17.
However, labels 16 and 17 are missing, while
15 is misplaced. The edge labels are set correctly
(as the last line shows), they only don't show up.
The weird thing is that other graphs work OK (at least th
> You might prefer the [1..n] notation, so you could do
>
> sage: [f(i) for i in [1..10]]
> [g(1), g(2), g(3), g(4), g(5), g(6), g(7), g(8), g(9), g(10)]
>
> (This really should be added to the wiki.)> sage: [f(i) for i in [1..10]]
Perhaps I'm missing something, but where do the g's come from? I
Hi Minh,
> I think this issue has been fixed in sage-3.1.4. Under sage-3.1.4, the
> command
>
> sage: lim ( x*(sqrt(x^2)-sqrt(x))/sqrt(x^2 -x), x=oo)
> +Infinity
>
> returns what you'd expect.
That's great news, perhaps I should update more frequently.
By any chance, does somebody know what was
(I'm not sure if this group is the right place to report bugs, but I'm
afraid I'd forgot about the issue
before I find the right place ...)
sage: lim ( x*(sqrt(x^2)-sqrt(x))/sqrt(x^2 -x), x=oo)
0
(The right answer is +Infinity, of course.)
after small modifications, the limit is evaluated corre
23 matches
Mail list logo
