On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Ethan Van Andel wrote:
> I'm working on expanding + optimizing my work with Riemann mapping
> (I'll post something more detailed soon). I would like to add the
> capability for parallel computation of the maps and plots. I see that
> mpi4py is the recommended tool
I worked with a patch for lapack, and stumbled upon an unclean hg repo
in the spkg. etc.
So I created an update for the lapack spkg that fixes this, and
created trac ticket #10121
to this end.
Should be trivial to review.
Thanks,
Dima
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegr
On 10/11/2010 01:12 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Thierry Dumont
wrote:
I am changing my server (used by hundreds of students...). It was base on a
old version of Sage, and I am switching to 4-5.2.
In my old version, I installed a patch to avatars.py so that Sage lo
On 2010-10-11 19:20, Tom Boothby wrote:
> Just to throw this out there... would it be possible to support both
> symbols for the time being, and issue a deprecation warning when
> _sig_on is used?
Yes, that would be possible and actually implemented in #10115. The
changes in #10115 are purely syn
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Thierry Dumont
wrote:
> I am changing my server (used by hundreds of students...). It was base on a
> old version of Sage, and I am switching to 4-5.2.
>
> In my old version, I installed a patch to avatars.py so that Sage looks at
> the ldap server of the universi
Just to throw this out there... would it be possible to support both
symbols for the time being, and issue a deprecation warning when
_sig_on is used?
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Simon King wrote:
> On Oct 11, 11:30 am, John Cremona wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Jeroen Demeyer
Hi Burcin and Karl-Dieter,
// 1 // And what do you think about log ? Look at these test :
exp(x).operator() == exp # is True, and all(?) trigonometric functions
are fine
log(x).operator() == ln # is True, yes the alias ln is better than the
log name
log(x).operator() == log # is False (this
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 17:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
kcrisman wrote:
> > It looks like the top level binomial() function is a mess already.
> >
> > - binomial does not accept variable when only in the lower argument
> > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9634
> >
> > - binomial does not accep
I'm working on expanding + optimizing my work with Riemann mapping
(I'll post something more detailed soon). I would like to add the
capability for parallel computation of the maps and plots. I see that
mpi4py is the recommended tool which is fine. However, is it
permissible to have a package that
On 11 October 2010 10:04, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> A proposal:
>
> One solution which can maybe make everybody happy is to release sage-4.6
> *without* #10115, but release sage-4.6.1.alpha0 immediately *with*
> #10115, such that developers can use sage-4.6.1.alpha0 to work with.
>
> Jeroen.
That s
Hello,
I am changing my server (used by hundreds of students...). It was base
on a old version of Sage, and I am switching to 4-5.2.
In my old version, I installed a patch to avatars.py so that Sage looks
at the ldap server of the university, and creates the user if necessary.
Is Sage alwa
On 2010-10-11 13:25, Simon King wrote:
> How many optional spkgs use _sig_on/_sig_off (I know that my
> cohomology spkg does)?
> These need to be updated (unless the old syntax remains available).
Good point. I've changed the patch adding _sig_on, _sig_str(s),
_sig_off for backwards compatibility
On Oct 11, 11:30 am, John Cremona wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Jeroen Demeyer
> wrote:
> > A proposal:
>
> > One solution which can maybe make everybody happy is to release sage-4.6
> > *without* #10115, but release sage-4.6.1.alpha0 immediately *with*
> > #10115, such that develop
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> A proposal:
>
> One solution which can maybe make everybody happy is to release sage-4.6
> *without* #10115, but release sage-4.6.1.alpha0 immediately *with*
> #10115, such that developers can use sage-4.6.1.alpha0 to work with.
>
That sou
A proposal:
One solution which can maybe make everybody happy is to release sage-4.6
*without* #10115, but release sage-4.6.1.alpha0 immediately *with*
#10115, such that developers can use sage-4.6.1.alpha0 to work with.
Jeroen.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups
On 2010-10-11 09:53, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> What's the justification for merging it now?
Only to reduce merge conflicts, to minimize the effort of rebasing
either my patch or other people's patches.
Jeroen.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe
On 10/11/10 07:14 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2010-10-11 00:40, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
IMHO, something that touches so many files, that's not a bug fix but
just renaming a command, has a fairly large risk/benefit factor.
It's true that it's not a bug fix by itself, but it prepares the way fo
17 matches
Mail list logo
