[sage-support] Re: Inequalities

That works because your inequation has exactly one variable. Currentkly, Maxima (and therefore Sage) can't solve an inequation with more than one variable (i. e. express the solution for one variable using otrher variables as parameters). HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mardi 4 avril 20

[sage-support] Re: Documentation on defining functions on Sage

This <https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/tutorial/tour_functions.html> should enlighten you... HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le vendredi 31 mars 2017 18:22:24 UTC+2, saad khalid a écrit : > > Hey everyone: > > I'm just looking for the documentation for properly defining f

[sage-support] A possible slight addition to symbolic sum operations

ts (I think so : for example, I have been unable to find the "right" designation of the operators : op_sum might be sage.functions.other.symbolic_sum, but I found nothing usable for op_add, hence the ridiculous re-computation of these constants at each call...). Sincerel

[sage-support] Re: A possible slight addition to symbolic sum operations

This is now Trac#22915 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22915>, which needs discussion. -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mercredi 26 avril 2017 08:35:30 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Sage can (awkwardly) do some simplifications of symbolic sums. For example > > sage:

[sage-support] Re: A possible slight addition to symbolic sum operations

See sage-devel <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sage-devel/9Dd3IiHvTYA> for a better proposal. -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mercredi 26 avril 2017 08:35:30 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Sage can (awkwardly) do some simplifications of symbolic sums. For example &

[sage-support] Re: How solve simple log equation?

systematically simplifying intermediate results leads to dead ends, and that's why sage doesn't do that. HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le dimanche 16 juillet 2017 00:44:03 UTC+2, Chris Seberino a écrit : > > This does not solve... > > var("y C") > solve( log(y) == C +

[sage-support] Re: How solve simple log equation?

Again, sorry for the noise... -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le dimanche 16 juillet 2017 18:29:46 UTC+2, Chris Seberino a écrit : > > Emmanuel > > Thank you for your reply but you solved a DIFFERENT equation. Notice mine > has an x variable in it. > I can get your's to work but

[sage-support] Re: Linking Sage cells in a wiki

Wjat's wrong with a = 10 Z8 = Integers(8) print Z8 print "Some text I'd like to display." Z8.list() ? -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le lundi 17 juillet 2017 14:04:38 UTC+2, Tom Judson a écrit : > > I am trying to link two Sage cells in a wikidot webpage. The following &g

Re: [sage-support] INSTALLATION SAGE

ional/experimental modules and the ability to patch/develop... HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mercredi 23 août 2017 00:58:08 UTC+2, vdelecroix a écrit : > > Which version of Ubuntu do you have? There is now a package that works > for Ubuntu 17.04 (zesty) > > https://pa

[sage-support] Re: Super newbie question re: solving systems of equations

t the first solution fulfills your constraints ? HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le jeudi 21 septembre 2017 20:27:43 UTC+2, Natalie Ulrich a écrit : > > I'm using SageMathCell to solve chemical equilibrium problems, so at least > one set of my solutions has to be real and positive.

[sage-support] Re: Super newbie question re: solving systems of equations

== -0.00831577369629076]] HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le vendredi 22 septembre 2017 13:40:45 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > what's wrong with : > > map(lambda S:map(lambda s:s.lhs()==s.rhs().n(), S), solve([eq1, eq2, eq3], > [x, y, z])) > > [[x == 0.0675142263037092, y

[sage-support] Re: Super newbie question re: solving systems of equations

889) - 83/20, x: -1/20*sqrt(2496889) + 15083/20}] HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le vendredi 22 septembre 2017 13:47:39 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Some may find my first answer a bit Lispish. More Pythonish : > > [[s.lhs()==s.rhs().n() for s in S] for S in

[sage-support] Re: Super newbie question re: solving systems of equations

uestion and showing what parts of the work you did yourself may help them choosing the right answer... HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier > > On Friday, September 22, 2017 at 7:03:38 AM UTC-5, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > >> Even more Pythonish, and more direct (no conversi

[sage-support] Possible new bug of solve()

r what it's worth, Mathematica has no problem solving the system (in its native interface) and gives relatively lightweight solutions ; I failed to obtain solutions from fricas, giac and maple, as well as to get Mathematica's answer through its Sage interface. HTH, -- Emmanuel Char

[sage-support] Re: Possible new bug of solve()

,z], S), ssol) HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le samedi 7 octobre 2017 20:19:55 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Inspired by an as.sagemath question > <https://ask.sagemath.org/question/39040/solving-a-system-of-equations-small-known-number-hinders-the-solution/>, >

[sage-support] Re: Possible new bug of solve()

I'd vote for a bug : since Maxima, used standalone, *can* solve this system, not being able to use it correctly *is* a bug. Somewhere in our interface... Le dimanche 8 octobre 2017 14:26:00 UTC+2, Maarten Derickx a écrit : > > It deserves a ticket, the main question is more whether the ticket s

[sage-support] Re: Possible new bug of solve()

n for var"). Manually translating these rules gives the Sage expression of the solutions. HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le dimanche 8 octobre 2017 11:59:33 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Another datapoint : Sympy seems to be able to (slowly) solve this system, > via : >

[sage-support] Re: Possible new bug of solve()

This is now Trac#23992 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23992#ticket>. HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le dimanche 8 octobre 2017 20:53:55 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > I'd vote for a bug : since Maxima, used standalone, *can* solve this > system, not being able

[sage-support] Re: Possible new bug of solve()

This is now Trac#23993 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23993#ticket>, but deserves further discussion. I'll post something on sage-devel after thinking it out. HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le dimanche 8 octobre 2017 20:59:26 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Yet

[sage-support] Possible bug with surfaces opacity in threejs

I think that I have found a problem with the rendering of semi-opaque surfaces in threejs : some portions of semi-opaque surfaces that should be rendered as if seen "through" other semi-opaque surfaces "snap" in and out of existence when the graph is rotated or rescaled. This is much more easi

[sage-support] Re: Possible bug with surfaces opacity in threejs

Is that related to the fact (empirical constatation) that a triangle with at least a non-numeric vertex (e. g. "NaN" float as the z coordinate) is eliminated from rendition in jmol and cython ? -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le lundi 16 octobre 2017 19:30:21 UTC+2, Andrey Novoseltsev a écri

[sage-support] Re: Error with simple integral, "CEXPT only defined for non-negative integral exponents."

faces show no enhancement). Rough conclusion : no CAS will save your skin if you use it "naively". Sympy seems to be marginally more useful than Maxima in this specific case, but our interface to it has to be perfected (work in progress...). -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mardi 7 nov

[sage-support] Re: How to send a sagetex file to someone who doesn't use sage?

eking \LaTeX-related work ;-). Question : is this ticket-worthy ? I didn't find any mention of it in existing tickets. -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mercredi 8 novembre 2017 18:31:28 UTC+1, kcrisman a écrit : > > Dear Deepak, > > Great question! I'm forwarding it to sage-s

Re: [sage-support] Re: How to send a sagetex file to someone who doesn't use sage?

Le jeudi 9 novembre 2017 00:29:49 UTC+1, William a écrit : > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > I tried to anwer this question, hinting at makestatic.py (part of > SageTeX). > > It turns out that this script is indeed unm

Re: [sage-support] Re: Fwd: Re: Re: numpy

's not implemented|implementable in Sage... Furthermore, you should consider if you need you result as a Sage object. For your purposes, in may be that (a part of) your algorithm is easier to express with Numpy ; so may be interested by implementing this part with Numpy and convert back to

Re: [sage-support] Re: Fwd: Re: Re: numpy

the wheel (and probably end up with an excentered ellipsoid... Programming is easy, correct programming can be excruciatingly hard !). More specifically : computing a sample of a sine wave is easy to do in Python. Plotting and playing it can be tricky. Use what you have to use to reuse the wo

[sage-support] Re: duplicate legend

I must be stupid : I can't see the problem... Could ypou amplify ? -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le lundi 22 janvier 2018 14:57:34 UTC+1, HG a écrit : > > Hi, > > After looking in few old tickets, I can't correct the duplicate legend ? > > c=3e8;h=6.626*(10^-34);k = 1.28

[sage-support] Re: What do the different `make ****clean` targets do?

The installation guide <http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/installation/> might come here handy ; especially this paragraph <http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/installation/source.html#make-targets>. HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le lundi 12 février 2018 02:57:16 UTC+1, rickhg12hs a écri

[sage-support] Re: plotting a surface defined in a domail

w how this is obtained. Given the changes currently undergoing in the graphics functions, you might want to use this only as a last-resort measure... -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le vendredi 9 mars 2018 12:24:50 UTC+1, Francesco a écrit : > > How can i plotting a function of two variables def

[sage-support] Re: Displaying Sagetex code

give us an example of what you want to do ? I have trouble visualizing it... -- Emmanuel Charpentier -- 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-sup

[sage-support] Re: jmol with java 10 and ubuntu 18.04 64bit

a 10. HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le lundi 14 mai 2018 15:03:02 UTC+2, Francesco a écrit : > > Now sage 8.1 is present in the repositories of ubuntu 18.04 64bit. I have > installed sage and i have same problems. > When i try to use 3d-commands in shell mode, and jmol stars,

[sage-support] Re: editor for sage commands

knitr <https://yihui.name/knitr/> (obtainable from CRAN) to the mix... HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le samedi 19 mai 2018 18:58:29 UTC+2, Francesco a écrit : > > Can you tell me a good editor for sage shell commands ? I try Texmacs, but > it crashes. > I have kubuntu 18.04 64

[sage-support] Re: editor for sage commands

ructions for installation, customization and use, which require but the very basics of emacs use essentially the ability to edit your .emacs file)... HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Il giorno sabato 19 maggio 2018 18:58:29 UTC+2, Francesco ha scritto: >> >> Can you tell me a good edi

[sage-support] A "remote sage kzernel" in the Jupiter notebook ?

he Jupyter notebook. Do you think that our current kernel would allow for that ? -- Emmanuel Charpentier -- 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 s

[sage-support] Re: editor for sage commands

I have not enough information about what happens in your system to understand your problem. Could you describe what you try and what happens then ? -- Emmanuel Charpentier > This is important for my job, end I can't lose the time for learning emacs > and sage-shell-mode. > >

[sage-support] Re: editor for sage commands

(arctan(x),x) does display a typeset formula or not ? HTH, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le mercredi 30 mai 2018 15:26:01 UTC+2, Francesco a écrit : > > Ok, now that's OK. > I have disabled inline plot display, so the plot command opens new window > of the file viewer with the image, a

[sage-support] Re: ESC[0;31mFile:ESC[0m - like crap while displaying docs in terminal

WorksForMe(TM). No crap... Isn-'t your teminal emilation the problem ? - What do you get when using another terminal emulation ? Or a (raw) console ? - What happens when you try to use (say) emacs in your terminal emulator (MATE termina, IIUC) ? -- Emmanuel Charpentie

[sage-support] Re: solving equations with parameters

Le lundi 13 août 2018 19:12:11 UTC+2, Dominique Laurain a écrit : > > One line answer : > > a,b,x,y = var('a,b,x,y') ; solve([ x + y == a, x - 2*y == b > ],x,y,dontsolve='a,b') > You don't even need that. Just specify that you want to solve for x and y : sage: var("x,y,a,b") (x, y, a, b) sage:

Re: [sage-support] Re: solving equations with parameters

Le lundi 13 août 2018 22:39:04 UTC+2, William a écrit : > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Simon King > wrote: > > Hi Dominique, > > > > On 2018-08-13, Dominique Laurain > > wrote: > >> PS : use asksagemath.org > > > > -1! > > > > There are people (I, for instance) who hate the guts

[sage-support] Re: Derivative of functions ...

One way to define (something almost the same as) what you want is : sage: f=piecewise([((-oo,0),x^3),((0,oo),x^2)],var=x) sage: f piecewise(x|-->x^3 on (-oo, 0), x|-->x^2 on (0, +oo); x) An indeed; you can do sage: plot(f(x),(x,-1,1), figsize=3) which seems correct. Except for the point 0, for wh

Re: [sage-support] algorithme

Le dimanche 20 janvier 2019 02:23:14 UTC+1, Anton Sherwood a écrit : > > On 2019-1-19 15:52, MAMANE DJAMILOU Salissou Dango wrote: > > Bonjour, > > je suis un tous nouveau utilisateur de sagemath. Je maîtrise les > > opérations indépendantes. Mon souci se trouve au nivaux des algorithmes. > > j

Re: [sage-support] algorithme

s/recommandé/recommander Le mardi 22 janvier 2019 09:47:21 UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Le dimanche 20 janvier 2019 02:23:14 UTC+1, Anton Sherwood a écrit : >> >> On 2019-1-19 15:52, MAMANE DJAMILOU Salissou Dango wrote: >> > Bonjour, >> > je

[sage-support] Re: bug in simple limit

You are right. Did you file a ticket ? Le jeudi 14 février 2019 22:37:21 UTC+1, list...@gmail.com a écrit : > > > Hello. > > I have found the following bug in limit. > > ┌┐ > > │ SageMath version 8.6, Release Date: 2019-01-15

[sage-support] Re: trig simplify disappointed me

Well... Sage does not, indeed, "automagically" apply all possible trig identities . But perusing them allow to select (with a tiny grain of salt) the right one: sage: tan(1/2*arctan(12/5)).subs(tan(w0/2)==sin(w0)/(1+cos(w0))) 2/3 HTH,

[sage-support] Re: solution of a 4th degree equation is real despite containing I but causes trouble

For the record : you shouldn't add a float (0.01) to an exact number (your root) : it complexifies and slows your computations to no avail. E. g. : sage: %time t = -2/3*((sqrt(3)*sqrt((675*(88/30375*I*sqrt(79)*sqrt(3) + 1328/337 : 5)^(2/3) + 552*(88/30375*I*sqrt(79)*sqrt(3) + 1328/3375)^(1/

[sage-support] Re: solution of a 4th degree equation is real despite containing I but causes trouble

What about : sage: %time t = -2/3*((sqrt(3)*sqrt((675*(88/30375*I*sqrt(79)*sqrt(3) + 1328/337 : 5)^(2/3) + 552*(88/30375*I*sqrt(79)*sqrt(3) + 1328/3375)^(1/3) + 364)/(88/3 : 0375*I*sqrt(79)*sqrt(3) + 1328/3375)^(1/3)) - 45*sqrt(-(88/30375*I*sqrt(79) : *sqrt(3) + 1328/3375)^(1/3) -

[sage-support] A case of immaculate conception...

Defining a symbolic function seems to declare its arguments. Case illustrated in this sagecell example : reset

[sage-support] Re: A case of immaculate conception...

Nice one, Simon ! I'm sorely tempted to mark is as "best answer":-)... But I wont, because I tend to think that, as long as we are insisting on explicit creation of symbolic variables, restricting the use of automatic declaration to the (old) (deprecated) Sage notebook and continue to make nois

[sage-support] Re: how do i get properly formatted sage output when running from emacs or commandline?

A (very) good alternative to the notebooks is sage-shell-mode , an emacs major mode providing - interaction with a Sage session - optionally, typesetting of the results - optionally, integration of (2D) graphics in the output. I tend to use

[sage-support] Re: How to graph on Sage

This kind of question translates to "I'm too lazy to search, so do my homework for me", and deserves a big fat RTFM , possibly also possibly pointing to a good book . Le vendredi 5 avril 2019 04:55:46 UTC+2, Jayro Marin a

[sage-support] A genuine bug in numerical evaluation ?

This ask.sagemath question seems to raise a genuine bug. Perusing Trac doesn't raise muc relevant, possibly except for Trac#24428 and Trac#21754

[sage-support] Re: A genuine bug in numerical evaluation ?

According to Serge Lelièvre, the proble doesn't occur when ran under a Python3-based Sage. He advises to run such a Sage, hich seems a bit early, IMHO? Advice ? Le jeudi 6 juin 2019 11:04:27 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > This ask.sagemath question > <https:/

[sage-support] Re: Problem with factor in SymbolicRing

Possible workaround: sage: num -1/2*(12*r^4*x + 4*r^2*x^3 + 4*r^2*x*y^2 - 4*r^2*x + 4*x^3 + 4*x*y^2)^2/(r^6 + 6*r^4*x^2 + r^2*x^4 + 2*r^4*y^2 + 2*r^2*x^2*y^2 + r^2*y^4 - 2*r^2*x^2 + x^4 + 2*r^2*y^2 + 2*x^2*y^2 + y^4)^2 - 1/2*(4*r^4*y + 4*r^2*x^2*y + 4*r^2*y^3 + 4*r^2*y + 4*x^2*y + 4*y^3)^2/(r^6

Re: [sage-support] blatantly wrong symbolic integral (via maxima) - bug report

Indeed. But no need for Mathematica : sage: f(x)= sqrt(2+sqrt(2+sqrt(2+2*cos(5*sqrt(x)+4*x^(-1/2) sage: h(x)= 2*cos(5/8*sqrt(x)+1/2)/sqrt(x) sage: P1=plot(f(x),(x,0,120),ymin=-0.5, ymax=0.85) sage: P2=plot(h(x),(x,0,120),ymin=-0.5, ymax=0.85) sage: P1+P2 [image: tmp_a7yhgbnu.png] BTW: How di

Re: [sage-support] blatantly wrong symbolic integral (via maxima) - bug report

, Le dimanche 25 août 2019 16:30:13 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > Indeed. But no need for Mathematica : > > sage: f(x)= sqrt(2+sqrt(2+sqrt(2+2*cos(5*sqrt(x)+4*x^(-1/2) > sage: h(x)= 2*cos(5/8*sqrt(x)+1/2)/sqrt(x) > sage: P1=plot(f(x),(x,0,120),ymin=-0.5, ymax=0.85)

Re: [sage-support] non homogeneous second differential equations

Big fat hint: Sage's standard methods are enough to solve this assignment. Another big fat hint: sage: r.library("fortunes") sage: r.fortune("'TFM'") This is all documented in TFM. Those who WTFM don't want to have to WTFM again on the mailing list. RTFM. -- Barry Rowlingson R-help (Oct

[sage-support] Re: "sage -n jupyter" and "sage -n" commands are not working

The three console screen image you attached (without converting them as text... Did you read them ?) have in common the same error message (twice on each screen): Failed to load module "canberra-gtk-module" This is a big fat hint. Googling for this single module name immediately leads you to a

[sage-support] Possible bug in integrate ?

Inspired by this ask.sagemath question . Minimal case is sage: f=function("f") sage: F(x)=integrate(f(t),t,0,x) sage: diff(F(x),x) --- AttributeError

[sage-support] Re: Possible bug in integrate ?

Thanks a lot ! That's perfectly clear... Any hints on how to file a ticket for this issue ? Le vendredi 25 octobre 2019 10:20:26 UTC+2, Nils Bruin a écrit : > > Yes, that's a bug. It happens in F(x).operator()._tderivative_ It > differentiates the bounds in case those vary with the differentiati

[sage-support] Re: Possible bug in integrate ?

This now Trac#28656 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/28656#ticket>. HTH, Le vendredi 25 octobre 2019 18:21:48 UTC+2, Nils Bruin a écrit : > > On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 3:27:42 AM UTC-7, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> Thanks a lot ! That's perfectly cl

[sage-support] Re: symbolic manipulation -- insufficient simplification

>From the docstrings: sage: x.simplify? Return a simplified version of this symbolic expression. Note: Currently, this just sends the expression to Maxima and converts it back to Sage. See also: "simplify_full()", "simplify_trig()", "simplify_rational()", "simplify_rectform()"

[sage-support] Re: Symbolic inverse in finite field

Well, the standard Sage operatins seem to be able to do what you want: sage: MS=MatrixSpace(GF(2), 5, 5) sage: MS Full MatrixSpace of 5 by 5 dense matrices over Finite Field of size 2 sage: M=MS.random_element();M [0 0 1 0 1] [0 0 1 1 0] [0 0 0 0 1] [1 1 0 1 0] [0 1 1 0 0] sage: M^-1 [0 1 0 1 1] [

[sage-support] Re: Symbolic inverse in finite field

Spoke too fast. Sorry for the noise... Le jeudi 31 octobre 2019 10:51:27 UTC+1, Subrata Nandi a écrit : > > My research area is symmetric key cryptology. I need an efficient > algorithm for solving inverse of symbolic matrix of size 512 x 512 in > GF(2). Can anyone share > Idea regarding that?

[sage-support] Re: Symbolic inverse in finite field

One can check that Sage's built-in methods can invert such a GF(2) maytrix in reasonable time: sage: MS=MatrixSpace(GF(2),512,512) sage: while True: : M=MS.an_element() : if M.is_unit(): break : sage: %time IM=M^-1 CPU times: user 2.99 ms, sys: 243 µs, total: 3.23 ms Wall

Re: [sage-support] Jupyter nootbook not work

Dear Jan; Le dimanche 29 décembre 2019 15:26:13 UTC+1, Jan Groenewald a écrit : > > Hi > > On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 at 15:54, Szabolcs Sződi > wrote: > There is something simply step by step instruction for simply, ordinary > mortals? Couldn't find anything. > > In SageMath Cell type > > notebook() >

[sage-support] Re: sagemath9 and python3

Le samedi 11 janvier 2020 11:49:08 UTC+1, Jean-François Ingenbleek a écrit : > > Hi, > > I just installed version 9 of Sagemath including version 3 of the Python > kernel. > > Does Sagemath contain its own version of Python3 so that it is possible to > uninstall another standalone version of P

[sage-support] Re: Approximating integral with infinite bounds

This question would have been more properly posed on ask.sagemath.org... The firs argument of numerical integral must be a function of one (real) variable returning a real. It is indeed possible to nest such integrals, but the second one *nests* the first one, hence long computation times. Exam

[sage-support] Re: Approximating integral with infinite bounds

Le samedi 29 février 2020 23:06:36 UTC+1, Simon King a écrit : > > Hi Emmanuel, > > On 2020-02-29, Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > This question would have been more properly posed on ask.sagemath.org... > > Why? > As I understand our current documen

[sage-support] Problem(s) wit fractional powers (possible bug + possible language deficiency)

Inspired by this ask.sagemath question : solve (6\frac{dy}{dx}-2y\,=\,xy^4) in the case (y(0)=-2). The question points that the “obvious” solution offered by Sage’s desolve is wrong : y=function("y") eq=6*diff(y(x),x)-2*y(x)==

[sage-support] ask.sagemath.org dow

Since about 18h (usage hour in Paris = UTC+2 in summer), ask.sagemath.org is inaccessible from my place. Is that general ? -- 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 a

[sage-support] Re: Sage crash (probably caused by a Debian system upgrade)

I forgot to specify that my Sage installation is compiled from source. HTH, -- 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...@googlegroup

Re: [sage-support] Sage crash (probably caused by a Debian system upgrade)

Le lundi 8 juin 2020 09:00:43 UTC+2, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : > > any update of a library used in Sage has potential for causing this. > Aaaarghhh... This makes Sage extremely brittle... I'll try `sage -b`, then `make`, and keep you posted. [ Snip... ] -- You received this message because y

Re: [sage-support] Sage crash (probably caused by a Debian system upgrade)

This didn't work (make failed to find a target for "random-clean") ; furthermore, Sage displayed a "failure to build Sage" notice at further attempts. In fact, nothing worked short of "make distclean ; ./configure ; make", which mercifully worked with apparent success... Le lundi 8 juin 2020 0

[sage-support] Nice mess in multiple derivatives...

Consider : sage: f=function("f") sage: m=var("m", domain="integer") sage: assume(m>0) Sage follows the Maxima convention for multiple derivation d^n/dx^n f(x) is diff(f(x),x,n) : sage: diff(sin(x),x,3) -cos(x) # Okay sage: diff(sin(x),x,m) 0 *## Huh ???* sage: diff(f(x),x,3) diff(f(x), x, x

[sage-support] Re: Nice mess in multiple derivatives...

Dear Karl-Dieter FYI, this thread, reposted by Éric Gourgoulhon on ~sage-devel~, has moved here . Le dimanche 2 août 2020 02:57:20 UTC+2, kcrisman a écrit : Just for information, I believe the

[sage-support] Possible serious bug : latexing an expression containing a held integral triggers its evaluation...

*Note : for once, this is a cross-post from ask.sagemath.org , for ticket advice…* Exploring this ask.sagemath question

[sage-support] Re: Possible serious bug : latexing an expression containing a held integral triggers its evaluation...

.1. HTH, Le dimanche 9 août 2020 16:00:11 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > *Note : for once, this is a cross-post from ask.sagemath.org > <https://ask.sagemath.org/question/52922/latexing-showing-or-viewing-a-held-integral-triggers-its-evaluation/>, > > for ticke

[sage-support] Re: Possible serious bug : latexing an expression containing a held integral triggers its evaluation...

nche 9 août 2020 16:31:47 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > The problem can be reproduced on [sagecell]( > https://sagecell.sagemath.org/?z=eJxVi0EKhDAMAO99SSKu4t5zEg-5-wFxQy2ILU1W8nx72cPCwMDAcKQ9KzgGNuI4pMsk1s0EvH-V1DeOfH5orV_BMCtNI7y7kjAsTrN2bKHUNsHZHgc2xL-weAu6RRluqZry9fMDXHA

[sage-support] Re: Possible serious bug : latexing an expression containing a held integral triggers its evaluation...

One more data point: calling latex (or show or view) on such an expression containing a held integral *in a hold context* gives a RecursionError. HTH, ​ Le dimanche 9 août 2020 17:38:10 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > On Cocalc > <https://cocalc.com/projects/d9f9cc

[sage-support] Re: Possible serious bug : latexing an expression containing a held integral triggers its evaluation...

This is now Trac#30326 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30326#ticket> (with priority major, but not critical, notwithstanding the potential for session/notebook crash or stalling). HTH, ​ Le dimanche 9 août 2020 16:00:11 UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > > *Note : for onc

[sage-support] Possible bug in PARI handling...

Inspiration is this ask.sagemath question . Roughly, the original question was a discrepancy between the *numerical* results obtained by Sa

Re: [sage-support] Re: solve and numerical answers

sage: L[1].n() fails because L1 is an equation, i. e a symbolic expression whose operator is the built-in “eq”, which has no n() method. However, sage: PP=-625/1000*t^4 + 2355/100*t^3 - 264051/1000*t^2 + 10269/10*t - 8538/10 sage: PP.parent() Symbolic Ring sage: L=solve(PP,t) sage: L[1].rhs()

Re: [sage-support] question about exercise

Le mercredi 16 septembre 2020 à 23:39:33 UTC+2, rachel...@gmail.com a écrit : > I dont know how to code in python > That may be the point of the exercise, don't you think ? HTH, On Wednesday, September 16, 2020 at 5:27:01 PM UTC-4 dim...@gmail.com wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:24 P

[sage-support] Re: integrating sin(t)/t

I can’t reproduce your problem : sage: sage.version.version '9.2.beta13' sage: var('t') t sage: assume(x>0) sage: f(x)=integrate(sin(t)/t,t,0,x) sage: f x |--> sin_integral(x) sage: taylor(f(x),x,0,10) 1/3265920*x^9 - 1/35280*x^7 + 1/600*x^5 - 1/18*x^3 + x My platform is Debian testing running

[sage-support] Re: factorial

Nope. This syntactic sugar is provided by `Maxima`'s and `Mathematica`'s readers, but not by Sage preparser. BTW, I'd write `gamma(3/2)` rather than `factorial(/2)`... Le mercredi 28 octobre 2020 à 09:56:24 UTC+1, HG a écrit : > Hi, > > I would like to know if it is possible to use ! instead fa

[sage-support] Re: packages

Le jeudi 12 novembre 2020 à 09:00:20 UTC+1, Cyrille Piatecki a écrit : > There are some distinction between Sagecell and Sagemath notebooks. For > instance the option "simpy" of "solve" does not work with Sagecel. But the option algorithm="sympy" does… Why ? Because there ain’t no bloody

[sage-support] Re: power series method pade(m,n) off by 1?

See my answer to the ask.sagemath question , whose the present question is a duplicate… Le mercredi 25 novembre 2020 à 13:42:44 UTC+1, Daniel Friedan a écrit : > For p a power series in x, p.pade(m,n) requires p to b

[sage-support] After upgrade of system's Python to 3.9; sage no longer starts

Setup : - Debian testing, amd64, 16 GB RAM - Sage 9.3.beta2 compiled from `develop` git branch, configured to use as much system packages as possible. A recent system update upgraded system’s python to3.9.rc1. Result : charpent@zen-book-flip:~$ sage Traceback (most recent call last): File "

[sage-support] Re: After upgrade of system's Python to 3.9; sage no longer starts

ake[1]: *** [Makefile:33 : all-start] Erreur 1 make[1] : on quitte le répertoire « /usr/local/sage-9 » make: *** [Makefile:13 : all] Erreur 2 real0m0,814s user0m1,144s sys0m0,206s This also happens after re-running ./bootstrap… Suggestions ? Le lundi 7 décembre 2020 à 09:52:38 UTC+1, Em

Re: [sage-support] After upgrade of system's Python to 3.9; sage no longer starts

Time for make distclean && make, I suppose… Thanks ! Le lundi 7 décembre 2020 à 10:06:43 UTC+1, dim...@gmail.com a écrit : > upgrading the python on which sage is built definitely needs a rebuild of > all python/cython modules. > > > On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, 08:52 Emmanuel

[sage-support] Re: Trouble getting *collect* to work with derivatives.

I think that your code doesn’t do what you think it does. Note for example that your declarations are self-contradicting : Pasting code; enter '--' alone on the line to stop or use Ctrl-D. :function("xp yp zp tp f") :var("x y z t v c") :-- (xp, yp, zp, tp, f) (x, y, z, t, v, c) sage: xp.parent(

[sage-support] Re: Trouble getting *collect* to work with derivatives.

Sage has recently acquired a large set of tools relative to manifolds . A look at these tools and related tutorials/references may be in order… HTH, Le samedi 23 janvier 2021 à 23:17:26 UTC+1, cseb...@gmail.com a écrit : > What you intend to do isn’t really cl

Re: [sage-support] Re: Trouble getting *collect* to work with derivatives.

the terms with the given second > derivative. > > On Sun, Jan 24, 2021, 2:15 AM Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > >> Sage has recently acquired a large set of tools relative to manifolds >> <https://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/>. A look at these tools and related &g

[sage-support] Re: documentation for simplify?

What Sage are you using ? Le vendredi 5 février 2021 à 21:41:09 UTC+1, fqgo...@colby.edu a écrit : > I just realized that when faced with > > log(a)-log(b) > > Sage does not normally simplify that log(a/b), or vice-versa. I tried > using f.simplify_full() and friends with no effect. > > Then I t

Re: [sage-support] About Polyhedron

Are those 65 inequalities independent ? For example ``` x+y<5 x+y<3 ``` are distinct, but only the second defines the solution : the first is implied by the second... Could you check the independence of the 65 inequalities in the paper ? For example, you may try to solve the system of 65 inequ

[sage-support] Possible bug in (our port of) Maxima : please check me

In 9.2.beta7, (our port of) Maxima seems to have an nice bug : inability to evaluate (some) symbolic sums. Minimal illustration : ``` ;;; Loading #P"/usr/local/sage-9/local/lib/ecl/sb-bsd-sockets.fas" ;;; Loading #P"/usr/local/sage-9/local/lib/ecl/sockets.fas" Maxima 5.44.0 http://maxima.sourcefo

Re: [sage-support] Possible bug in (our port of) Maxima : please check me

Le samedi 20 février 2021 à 17:37:30 UTC+1, dim...@gmail.com a écrit : > On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 11:10 AM Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > > > > In 9.2.beta7, (our port of) Maxima seems to have an nice bug : inability > to evaluate (some) symbolic sums.

[sage-support] An incorrect graph (computation ?) I do not undertstand

s), possibly with an ndication of its (their) magnituds(s) ? Sincerely, -- Emmanuel Charpentier -- 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-supp

[sage-support] Re: An incorrect graph (computation ?) I do not undertstand

cloud. Any idea ? -- Emmanuel Charpentier -- 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 grou

Re: [sage-support] Re: An incorrect graph (computation ?) I do not undertstand

components (allowing for infinite bounds) that could be used for this purpose ? To be continued, -- Emmanuel Charpentier Le jeudi 16 avril 2015 14:22:06 UTC+2, William a écrit : > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:27 AM, Emmanuel Charpentier > > wrote: > > Never mind the plots (you can

  1   2   3   4   5   >