Re: [sage-devel] Fwd: [ODK participants] Blog post on fast multivariate arithmetic

It seems like you've done a good job with it anyway. Thanks for the description. Bill. On Thursday, 13 July 2017 20:46:21 UTC+2, bluescarni wrote: > > mppp also uses a small value optimisation. The number of limbs that can be > stored without dynamic memory allocation can be selected at

[sage-devel] Re: Bug in groebner_basis()?

Hi Daniel, On 2017-07-14, Daniel Krenn wrote: >>> R. = PolynomialRing(QQ, 'lex') >> That's not what you want. >> [...] >> Instead you have to do >> sage: R. = PolynomialRing(QQ, order='lex') >> (i.e., specify what parameter is 'lex' being assigned to) > > What does the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Bug in groebner_basis()?

On 2017-07-14 16:41, Simon King wrote: > On 2017-07-14, Johannes Schwab wrote: >> Here is the code: >> R. = PolynomialRing(QQ, 'lex') > That's not what you want. > [...] > Instead you have to do > sage: R. = PolynomialRing(QQ, order='lex') > (i.e., specify what

[sage-devel] Re: Bug in groebner_basis()?

Hi Johannes, On 2017-07-14, Johannes Schwab wrote: > Here is the code: > R. = PolynomialRing(QQ, 'lex') That's not what you want. sage: R.term_order() Degree reverse lexicographic term order Instead you have to do sage: R. = PolynomialRing(QQ, order='lex')

[sage-devel] Bug in groebner_basis()?

Hello, I think I stumbled across a bug in groebner_basis(). The example below doesn't generate the unique reduced Groebner basis of the ideal generated by f and g, but instead the set [y^3 + 2*y^2 - x - y, x^2 + 2*y, x*y - y^2 + 1] is returned. This set isn't a Groebner basis at all. The

[sage-devel] Re: Error installing OpenBlas on Linux Mint

I had the same issue with openblas, but on a Thinkpad 11e with an intel Celeron N2940 processor. Setting OPENBLAS_CONFIGURE="TARGET=ATOM" fixed this for me as well. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/-Exvx0bane8/9kC8hBEFBwAJ I assumed this was limited to lower-end processors like the

[sage-devel] Re: Error building Sage on UM 16.04: error making OpenBLAS

Well, I have successfully built Sage on my 11e—over a period of several hours! :-) Right now I'm running the tests with ./sage --testall to make sure everything is a-ok, but cli Sage starts, as does the notebook, so it looks good so far. Maybe I'll try building the dev version of openblas on

Re: [sage-devel] Two issues about the coding theory method "weight_enumerator"

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 5:35 AM, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > Thanks a lot for reporting! We *really* appreciate any feedback from > using Sage in classes: on bugs, designs and feature requests. > > This bug is now #23433. I'll push a patch momentarily. > Thank you, Johan!

Re: [sage-devel] Two issues about the coding theory method "weight_enumerator"

Thanks a lot for reporting! We *really* appreciate any feedback from using Sage in classes: on bugs, designs and feature requests. This bug is now #23433. I'll push a patch momentarily. Best, Johan Rosenkilde Dima Pasechnik writes: > On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 11:43:18 AM UTC+1, David

Re: [sage-devel] Two issues about the coding theory method "weight_enumerator"

On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 11:43:18 AM UTC+1, David Joyner wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:59 AM, 'B. L.' via sage-devel > wrote: > > Dear Sage-Developers, > > > > I'd like to report two issues that I came across when working with the > > coding theory

[sage-devel] Re: Error building Sage on UM 16.04: error making OpenBLAS

Indeed, OPENBLAS_CONFIGURE="TARGET=ATOM" is a catch-all x86_64 processors target. Perhaps one can try the development version of openblas on these processors (from https://github.com/xianyi/OpenBLAS) On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 12:29:12 AM UTC+1, Christopher Phoenix wrote: > > I'm building Sage