On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:31 PM, David Roe wrote:
>> As for why your viewpoint might be harmful: I have heard anecdotes of
>> people
>> not wanting to release their code because it was ugly, or nonstandard, or
>> difficult to use, etc. As long as the response that they are going to
>> receive
>> i
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:08, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>> Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
>>
>> I could, but then we will no longer have a 10.6 build/test machine, I
>> think,
In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>> Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
>
> I could, but then we will no longer have a 10.6 build/test machine, I
> think, and that would be bad.
> Also, I can't do this until next wee
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
I could, but then we will no longer have a 10.6 build/test machine, I
think, and that would be bad.
Also, I can't do this until next week, since I'm in San Diego right now.
> sqrt5 is down again
Can we get Lion on bsd.math.washington.edu ?
sqrt5 is down again...
Dima
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com
I agree of course that we should converse in a civil manner.
On Friday, February 3, 2012 10:39:45 PM UTC-8, Jonathan Bober wrote:
>
> In general, person X might use nonstandard GNU extension Y for many
> reasons,
>
In my experience, it usually boils down to
5) Person used language extension wi
Le 04/02/2012 07:39, Jonathan Bober a écrit :
For another example: I recently tried to compile some of my own code using
clang++ and discovered that I am not allowed to do
void f(int j) {
complex x[j];
[...]
}
even though g++ accepts that. ( See
http://clang.llvm.org/compatibility.htm
>
> As for why your viewpoint might be harmful: I have heard anecdotes of
> people
> not wanting to release their code because it was ugly, or nonstandard, or
> difficult to use, etc. As long as the response that they are going to
> receive
> it along the lines of the above, that viewpoint is valid
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
>
> But it makes the code unportable. What hope do we have with the Sun/Oracle
> compiler if idiots use non-standard C? What hope do we have if we try to
> build on Windows at some point in the future using a native compiler? All
> these GNU
On Friday, February 3, 2012 8:33:53 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>
>
> Just to clarify, does gcc-4.2 *not* come with the latex XCode 4.x, but
> it came with earlier XCode 4.x's?I have gcc-4.2 on my laptop, and
> I've never installed anything but XCode 4.x on it.
>
> Just curious.
>
I think that
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04 AM, John H Palmieri
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmi
On Feb 1, 2012, at 04:46 , Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 5:01:41 AM UTC+8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri wrote:
[snip]
>> I've started looking into the difficulties of getting sage to build
>> with clang (on lion), and hav
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 04:46, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 5:01:41 AM UTC+8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012
On Wednesday, February 1, 2012 5:01:41 AM UTC+8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, Jan 1
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 14:13, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:01:41 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 15:52, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> On 01/31/12 09:20 PM, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 13:13, Volker Braun wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:01:41 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
(Beyond the issue of fortran) I'm not sure if
On 01/31/12 09:20 PM, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 13:13, Volker Braun wrote:
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:01:41 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
(Beyond the issue of fortran) I'm not sure if it will be possible to
build all of the sage libraries with clang. For instance,
What I'm trying to say is: Upstream needs to be informed that they
shouldn't use non-standard C extensions. Nested functions especially are a
bad design choice in a world that is moving away from executable stacks.
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubs
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:01:41 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, Jan 16,
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 13:13, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:01:41 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>>
>> (Beyond the issue of fortran) I'm not sure if it will be possible to
>> build all of the sage libraries with clang. For instance, it currently
>> doesn't yet support nes
On Tuesday, January 31, 2012 1:01:41 PM UTC-8, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
>
> (Beyond the issue of fortran) I'm not sure if it will be possible to
> build all of the sage libraries with clang. For instance, it currently
> doesn't yet support nested functions, which I know at least ratpoints
> uses.
>
C
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:04, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmieri
On Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:59:45 PM UTC-8, William wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Monday, January 16, 2012 7:42:4
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> On Jan 17, 2012, at 14:04 , William Stein wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM, John Cremona wrote:
> After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this:
>
>> Let me run the full test suite of Sage first, having built PAR
On Jan 17, 2012, at 14:04 , William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM, John Cremona wrote:
After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this:
> Let me run the full test suite of Sage first, having built PARI with
> -O0 and see what happens. If that works, I will just ne
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:16 PM, John Cremona wrote:
> On 17 January 2012 23:04, William Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM, John Cremona wrote:
> After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this:
For the record, running tests with "sage -t devel/sage/sage" yield
On 17 January 2012 23:04, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM, John Cremona wrote:
After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this:
>>>
>>> For the record, running tests with "sage -t devel/sage/sage" yields
>>> hundred(s) of failing files:
>>>
>>> http://wstein.o
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:47 PM, John Cremona wrote:
>>> After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this:
>>
>> For the record, running tests with "sage -t devel/sage/sage" yields
>> hundred(s) of failing files:
>>
>> http://wstein.org/home/wstein/tmp/test-sage-5.0.beta1-osx10.7.txt
>>
>>
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 1:39 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmieri
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, January 16, 2012 7:42:49 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
Hi,
A major blocker for Sage-5
>> After building Sage on OS X 10.7, "make test" did this:
>
> For the record, running tests with "sage -t devel/sage/sage" yields
> hundred(s) of failing files:
>
> http://wstein.org/home/wstein/tmp/test-sage-5.0.beta1-osx10.7.txt
>
> It could be that most of these boil down to some code at the
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:43 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmieri
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Monday, January 16, 2012 7:42:49 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> A major blocker for Sage-5.0 is supporting OS X (version 10.7 -- the
>>> version that has be
On 2012-01-17 03:24, Dan Drake wrote:
>> Huh? So I guess running "make test" doesn't work right in
>> sage-5.0.beta1 since sage-env is missing (why?).
>
> Is it related to http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11073 ?
Yes, it is. Should be fixed now in the latest version of #11073.
--
To
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 at 03:43PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
> Testing that Sage starts...
> [2012-01-16 09:10:19] Sage version 5.0.beta1, released 2012-01-13
> Yes, Sage starts.
> . local/bin/sage-env && sage-maketest
> /bin/sh: local/bin/sage-env: No such file or directory
> make: *** [test] Error
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:26 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, January 16, 2012 7:42:49 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A major blocker for Sage-5.0 is supporting OS X (version 10.7 -- the
>> version that has been out for months now).
>>
>> Fortunately, it is now "relatively eas
On Monday, January 16, 2012 7:42:49 AM UTC-8, William wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> A major blocker for Sage-5.0 is supporting OS X (version 10.7 -- the
> version that has been out for months now).
>
> Fortunately, it is now "relatively easy" to build sage-5.0.beta1 on OS
> X 10.7 with XCode 4.x, and have i
35 matches
Mail list logo
