On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 12:05:48 PM UTC-7, Robert Dodier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for the record I've tried this problem with a translation of the
> script to pure Maxima and I can't reproduce the error. I'm working
> with a recent Maxima build (post-5.41) and ECL 16.1.3 on Linux x86. I
> tried
Excellent detective work! That gets it down to the following script:
var('r12,r13,r23')
var('m1,m2,m3')
assume(m1>0,m2>0) #removing this line lets the script complete without
trouble
See also Robert Dodier's related thread showing that Maxima seems not to be
the culprit.
--
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
See also Robert Daudier's related thread showing that Maxima seems not to
be the culprit.
--
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
I attach here
1. a stripped-down Sage script,
2. a PDB script which leads to the failing statement.
The failing Sage code reads:
> >
> /home/rllozes/Development/sage/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage/interfaces/maxima_lib.py(452)_eval_line()
> -> result = ((result + '\n') if
I will post the failing Sage call on the original thread, along with the
full PDB script.
--
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
That appears to be what I'm running via the Sage interface:
[sage-beta is my soft-link to sage-8.3-beta5]
rllozes@linux-yzi3:~/temp> sage-beta --maxima
;;; Loading
#P"/home/rllozes/Development/sage/local/lib/ecl/sb-bsd-sockets.fas"
;;; Loading
On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 7:39:46 PM UTC-7, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
>
> An implementation question: separately from having a category of super
>> commutative algebras, I could imagine wanting the option to use a tensor
>> product of graded algebras which includes a sign in the product:
Hi Travis,
On 2018-06-17, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
> Then IMO it should be SuperCommutative/super-commutative. Yet, I do not
> think there will be any ambiguity over the meaning of a commutative
> superalgebra, which is why I was suggesting to use the Commutative axiom.
Yes, but by using that
