Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

> On Oct 27, 2016, at 10:47, William Stein wrote: > > Just curious: what choice does magma (or maple or Mathematica etc) make > regarding this? Magma acts as follows, when the matrices are square, but different sizes, or when one or both are non-square: >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:42:56 PM UTC-7, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:12:01 PM UTC-5, William wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, kcrisman wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:11:58 PM UTC-4,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:12:01 PM UTC-5, William wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, kcrisman > wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:11:58 PM UTC-4, John H Palmieri > wrote: > >> > >> (1) Why should a nonsquare matrix even have an

Re: [sage-devel] Re: sage's increasingly long startup time?

Well, Python isn't exactly efficient when it comes to system calls... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To

Re: [sage-devel] Re: sage's increasingly long startup time?

This is more what concerns me: ~$ strace sage-7.4 -c pass 2>a ~$ wc -l a 35137 ~$ grep stat a |wc -l 8712 ~$ grep open a |wc -l 10289 ~$ grep read a |wc -l 5645 etc. I was wrong -- its "only" 8712 stats. Anyway, I probably just need to tweak os caching parameters or the disk, since of course

[sage-devel] Re: sage's increasingly long startup time?

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 21:22:23 UTC+2, Eric Gourgoulhon a écrit : > > Hi, > > Which computer are you using? On my 5-years old laptop (Core i5-2410M + 4 > GB memory), it takes "only" 22 seconds. Running a second *time* takes 1.4 > second. > > Best regards, > > Eric. > > > -- You received

Re: [sage-devel] sage's increasingly long startup time?

On 27 October 2016 at 20:08, William Stein wrote: > Does anybody else find this depressing? > > ⨯ time sage-7.4 -c pass > 2.18user 0.99system 0:34.29elapsed 9%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata > 170712maxresident)k > 285672inputs+8outputs (628major+49021minor)pagefaults 0swaps > > 35

[sage-devel] Re: sage's increasingly long startup time?

Hi, Which computer are you using? On my 5-years old laptop (Core i5-2410M + 4 GB memory), it takes "only" 22 seconds. Running a second takes 1.4 second. Best regards, Eric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from

[sage-devel] jsmol.js

In case anybody cares, in Sage-7.4 this bug remains https://github.com/jupyterhub/jupyterhub/issues/401 which blocks 3d graphics in jupyter/sage working at all for sage and jupyter hub: https://github.com/sagemathinc/smc/issues/159 It seems like according to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, kcrisman wrote: > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:11:58 PM UTC-4, John H Palmieri wrote: >> >> (1) Why should a nonsquare matrix even have an "is_similar" method? Can we >> get rid of that? (Same for "determinant" and some other

[sage-devel] sage's increasingly long startup time?

Does anybody else find this depressing? ⨯ time sage-7.4 -c pass 2.18user 0.99system 0:34.29elapsed 9%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 170712maxresident)k 285672inputs+8outputs (628major+49021minor)pagefaults 0swaps 35 seconds? Yes, I know, doing it again is fast, since it can stat 100K files using the

Re: [sage-devel] Trac error on push

The machine hosting trac did change recently. On 27 October 2016 at 19:17, jhonrubia6 wrote: > After working on ticket #21052, I committed the changed file and tried to > git trac push and get the error > > git_trac.git_error.GitError: git returned with non-zero exit

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On 27 October 2016 at 18:47, William Stein wrote: > Just curious: what choice does magma (or maple or Mathematica etc) make > regarding this? Using Magma V2.22-3 I am not impressed: > A:=Matrix([[1,2],[3,4]]); > B:=Matrix([[1,2],[3,4]]); > Parent(A); Full Matrix Algebra of

[sage-devel] Re: vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:11:58 PM UTC-4, John H Palmieri wrote: > > (1) Why should a nonsquare matrix even have an "is_similar" method? Can we > get rid of that? (Same for "determinant" and some other methods.) > Those are not even the most annoying methods like this throughout Sage

[sage-devel] Trac error on push

After working on ticket #21052, I committed the changed file and tried to git trac push and get the error git_trac.git_error.GitError: git returned with non-zero exit code (128) when executing "git push trac HEAD:refs/heads/u/jhonrubia6/add_pictures_to_implicit_plot3d_py" STDERR:

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

> So either they will stop distribute R or they will patch >> en-masse. >> > > Somehow, I doubt it. > > Probably nobody even bothered to notice or notify e.g. Debian? Thanks for working on this; how annoying. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

[sage-devel] Re: vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

(1) Why should a nonsquare matrix even have an "is_similar" method? Can we get rid of that? (Same for "determinant" and some other methods.) (2) What is the definition of similar? (a) Two matrices M and N, both square of the same size, are similar iff there is an invertible matrix P so that

[sage-devel] coercion failure?

See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21777 for a surprising (to me) relict of what appears to be coercion failure - I don't know who is around who is an expert in this and might be able to diagnose it, hopefully someone here is. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

Mathematica doesn't seem to have such a function for checking similarity. Maple returns false. I don't know for magma. Best, Travis On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 12:47:29 PM UTC-5, William wrote: > > Just curious: what choice does magma (or maple or Mathematica etc) make > regarding this?

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On 10/27/2016 12:21 PM, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > I am for BB because: > Both options have merit. If most people think we should have a user-friendly error for a common mistake (mismatched dimensions), then maybe it makes sense to add an ignore_dims (default: False) parameter for the people who

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

Just curious: what choice does magma (or maple or Mathematica etc) make regarding this? On Thursday, October 27, 2016, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > AA > (but make sure docs make sense after the change) > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:21:02 PM UTC, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:

Re: [sage-devel] Multivariate polynomial factoring and bug(?)

factorisation of multivariate polynomials is very slow. This is a fact of life. On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 9:38:48 AM UTC, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > > > Concerning your code, it got stuck on the first run? What is the > > degree of the

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

AA (but make sure docs make sense after the change) On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:21:02 PM UTC, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > > I am for BB because: > > 1 - the definition (as even given in the docstring) still makes full sense > if the matrices are not the same size or if they are not square.

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

I am for BB because: 1 - the definition (as even given in the docstring) still makes full sense if the matrices are not the same size or if they are not square. There does not exist such a matrix P. 2 - It puts an unnecessary burden on the average user. They have to deal with errors on a

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 5:28:41 PM UTC+2, William wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 5:16:02 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote: > >> > >> But you're right, by default Debian

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 5:16:02 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: >> >> But you're right, by default Debian links to openssl: >> https://packages.debian.org/sid/libcurl3 >> >> And indeed curl is not GPL

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 5:23:58 PM UTC+2, William wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We've been down this road before with Sage, and it's pretty annoying. > I've personally wasted hundreds of hours on it (GNUtls, openssl, etc.) > Programmers playing lawyers have ended up with a broken and >

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 5:16:02 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > But you're right, by default Debian links to openssl: > https://packages.debian.org/sid/libcurl3 > > And indeed curl is not GPL anyway: > https://curl.haxx.se/docs/copyright.html > Groumpf. > See

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 5:18:40 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > > Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 17:00:05 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : >> >> >> >> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:59:02 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, October 27, 2016

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Hi, We've been down this road before with Sage, and it's pretty annoying. I've personally wasted hundreds of hours on it (GNUtls, openssl, etc.) Programmers playing lawyers have ended up with a broken and inconsistent legal foundation. There is no easy way out, since only copyright owners can

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

But you're right, by default Debian links to openssl: https://packages.debian.org/sid/libcurl3 And indeed curl is not GPL anyway: https://curl.haxx.se/docs/copyright.html Groumpf. See https://curl.haxx.se/legal/distro-dilemma.html for more rumbling. Now what if a GPL application links to

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 17:00:05 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:59:02 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:49:23 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 16:59:02 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:49:23 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> >> >> Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 16:04:52 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 3:59:26

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:59:02 PM UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:49:23 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> >> >> Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 16:04:52 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 4:49:23 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > > Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 16:04:52 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : >> >> >> >> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 3:59:26 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 16:04:52 UTC+2, Jean-Pierre Flori a écrit : > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 3:59:26 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> >> >> Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 13:10:17 UTC+2, François a écrit : >>> >>> It is a most interesting point because it explain why

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 3:59:26 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > > Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 13:10:17 UTC+2, François a écrit : >> >> It is a most interesting point because it explain why >> the R binary installed from epel for RH7.1 and family >> isn’t linked to openssl.

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Building R against a ssl-less libcurl works (modulo patching configure) and does not seem to add errors into R's test suite. So I suggest the following: [123]: * add curl as a standard package and let it use ssl if present except when making dist tarballs (ticket needs some tweaking in case of

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 13:10:17 UTC+2, François a écrit : > > It is a most interesting point because it explain why > the R binary installed from epel for RH7.1 and family > isn’t linked to openssl. > How old is RH7.1 ? The introduction of the libcurl requirement dates from the R 3.3.0

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

+1 on AA. Florent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-support] sage-7.4-Ubuntu_16.04-x86_64.tar.bz2 fails to install correctly

https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21772 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Frédéric Chapoton wrote: > Hello, > > on https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18505, we are trying to enhance the > is_similar method of matrices. > > Because we cannot agree, we require your vote on the following matter: > > 1) When

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

It is a most interesting point because it explain why the R binary installed from epel for RH7.1 and family isn’t linked to openssl. If they don’t have a rock solid argument, and even if they have, there may not be anymore official R packages from big league binary distros. Unless they patch R,

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

Agreed: AA. On Oct 27, 2016 04:53, "Vincent Delecroix" <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > me too: AA > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 12:22:37 PM UTC+2, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > I'm afraid that we don't have much say in the matter : the R core > development team has choosen to rely on curl, and their build system will > fail without it. Furthermore, among those 9402 packages, a lot of

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

While not configurable by the user in R-3.2.x it would build if libcurl wasn’t found or missing https support. The change to bail out if you don’t fulfil all the condition appear deliberate to me. And I see the point from a support point of view. My conclusion is that R developers would fill it

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

I'm afraid that we don't have much say in the matter : the R core development team has choosen to rely on curl, and their build system will fail without it. Furthermore, among those 9402 packages, a lot of them may have choosen to follow R "guidance" an use CURL. If we choose to use another

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 12:02:42 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2016-10-27 11:49, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 11:41:20 AM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer > wrote: > > > > On 2016-10-27 11:29, Francois Bissey wrote: > > > R package

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 11:29:12 UTC+2, François a écrit : > > R package system include downloading facility from repositories. > That’s why you need curl. At least in theory. > In practice, web access to (a lot of) data repositories, databases, etc... is more and more used : there is no

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

My own examination of R-3.3.1 configure script is that configure will fail if libcurl 7.28+ is not present or present with ssl disabled [m4/R.m4 line 4215 thereafter]. Unless the code for `install.package` has significantly changed between 3.2.x and 3.3.x it is an unnecessary failure dictated by

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

As of this morning, CRAN offered 9402 packages... These packages offer practical implementations for a tremendous list of applied statistics problems (and more...). Using R "without its packaging system" is about as useful as using Python without pip or any other Python packaging system... --

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On 2016-10-27 11:49, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 11:41:20 AM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: On 2016-10-27 11:29, Francois Bissey wrote: > R package system include downloading facility from repositories. That's fine but it should be possible to just

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 11:41:20 AM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2016-10-27 11:29, Francois Bissey wrote: > > R package system include downloading facility from repositories. > > That's fine but it should be possible to just run R without it's > packaging system. > Then I

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

On 2016-10-27 11:29, Francois Bissey wrote: R package system include downloading facility from repositories. That's fine but it should be possible to just run R without it's packaging system. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group.

Re: [sage-devel] Multivariate polynomial factoring and bug(?)

On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Vincent Delecroix wrote: Concerning your code, it got stuck on the first run? What is the degree of the polynomial you are trying to factorize? It stucks in every run. You can run my test code, it does not take so long. Degree is 199. And I have no idea about the

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

R package system include downloading facility from repositories. That’s why you need curl. At least in theory. I’ll have to check for 3.3.x but there was alternatives in 3.2.x. François > On 27/10/2016, at 22:26, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > This is the obvious answer: >

Re: [sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

This is the obvious answer: [6] or patch R not to use curl Why should I need a web download tool to do calculations in statistics? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from

Re: [sage-devel] Multivariate polynomial factoring and bug(?)

On 27 October 2016 at 11:21, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > >> 1) What is [a, b, c, d, e]? > > > Arghs, forgot the definition list: > > R. = QQ['a, b, c, d, e'] > >> 2) Your would better replace >> >> [a, b, c, d,

Re: [sage-devel] Multivariate polynomial factoring and bug(?)

On Thu, 27 Oct 2016, Vincent Delecroix wrote: 1) What is [a, b, c, d, e]? Arghs, forgot the definition list: R. = QQ['a, b, c, d, e'] 2) Your would better replace [a, b, c, d, e][randint(0,4)] by choice([a,b,c,d,e]) That means using plain Python function to get a

Re: [sage-devel] Multivariate polynomial factoring and bug(?)

1) What is [a, b, c, d, e]? 2) Your would better replace [a, b, c, d, e][randint(0,4)] by choice([a,b,c,d,e]) On 27 October 2016 at 10:00, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > As we now have Singular 4, I just made a little random test: > > set_random_seed(0) > for i in

Re: [sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

me too: AA -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to

[sage-devel] vote on behaviour of is_similar for matrices

Hello, on https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18505, we are trying to enhance the *is_similar* method of matrices. Because we cannot agree, we require your vote on the following matter: 1) When M.is_similar(N) is called and either M or N is not square: A) raise an helpful specific error message

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Notebook stuck on "N?" with a worksheet

Here's a quite popular service to share Jupyter notebooks together with a preset environment (e.g., a SageMath kernel) : http://mybinder.org/ Quite a different workflow compared to sharing a notebook on a SageNB server, though. Luca On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Jori Mäntysalo

[sage-devel] R 3.3.1 depends on a SSL/TLS implementation

Hi all, The latest R versions depends on libcurl and actually more than that: on a libcurl with https support. So we might want to build our own libcurl with https support (see #21767) but we then need an SSL/TLS implementation which Sage curretnly provides only optionally through openSSL

[sage-devel] Multivariate polynomial factoring and bug(?)

As we now have Singular 4, I just made a little random test: set_random_seed(0) for i in range(1000): P = 1 while random() < 0.9: M = (randint(1, 5) * ([a, b, c, d, e][randint(0, 4)])^randint(1, 5)) A = (randint(1, 5) * ([a, b, c, d, e][randint(0, 4)])^randint(1, 5))