[sage-devel] Re: [Enthought-dev] mayavi in sage, howto
On 03/06/09 13:18, Ondrej Certik wrote: After I do that it works fine. However, it might be nice to fix this be default by changing the content type response? That's weird, it works for me and I also use firefox. Do you know how I can reproduce the problem? Unfortunately, I have no idea. I am running Firefox 3.0.3 on Ubuntu 8.04. cheers, prabhu --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] missing sphinxification
Hi, I think /sage/group/generic.py docstrings have not been changed. Cheers --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: missing sphinxification
There seem to be *hundreds* of files missing from the new reference manual. I did a grep: da...@groke:~/sage-3.4.rc0/devel/sage-main/sage grep EXAMPL.*[^:]:$ -lr * to pick up files that contained EXAMPLES: with a single colon rather than a double one, and it turned up no fewer than 510 files! Some of these, e.g. algebras/steenrod_algebra.py, are fine -- they just have examples subdivided into smaller groups within a docstring -- but of the 10 or so files I looked at, the other 9 were all rogue. In particular, large parts of the number fields code have no entries in the reference manual, and nor do group algebras, Kodaira symbols, Galois groups... Checking in 3.3, it seems that these files were never linked into the reference manual in the first place; but is there ever any good reason why a file that has docstrings should be excluded from the manual? David On Mar 6, 8:30 am, YannLC yannlaiglecha...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I think /sage/group/generic.py docstrings have not been changed. Cheers --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: missing sphinxification
Hello, On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:18 AM, davidloeffler dave.loeff...@gmail.com wrote: There seem to be *hundreds* of files missing from the new reference manual. I did a grep: da...@groke:~/sage-3.4.rc0/devel/sage-main/sage grep EXAMPL.*[^:]:$ -lr * Yes, there are lots of things not in the reference manual. In 3.4, you can run sage -docbuild reference print_unincluded_modules to get a list of the ones that aren't in the reference manual. Checking in 3.3, it seems that these files were never linked into the reference manual in the first place; but is there ever any good reason why a file that has docstrings should be excluded from the manual? No, there's not a good reason. The primary reason that they were left out before was probably people weren't familiar enough with how to include the autogenerated stuff in the reference manual. Hopefully it will be easier to work on now. That being said, we should make an effort to get more included. I didn't convert any module that wasn't already in the reference manual since managing / rebasing patches against 400 files over 2 months of Sage releases was enough work as it is. I can make some improvements to my code which handles a large chunk of the conversion automatically, but it's also fairly easy to go through and convert things by hand. --Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage 3.2.3 os x 10.5 extension loading...
Ok I'll rephrase that: Is there another version of sage that I should be using? Something I can do to fix this? On Mar 6, 1:05 am, Simon Beaumont s...@modelsciences.com wrote: Can anyone cast any light on this for me? This is OOB sage python 00:41 chi:lib.macosx-10.3-i386-2.5 504\ sage --version Sage Version 3.2.3, Release Date: 2009-01-05 00:41 chi:lib.macosx-10.3-i386-2.5 505\ sage -python Python 2.5.2 (r252:60911, Jan 6 2009, 19:03:06) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5465)] on darwin Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. import _cublas Traceback (most recent call last): File stdin, line 1, in module ImportError: dlopen(./_cublas.so, 2): Symbol not found: __cg_png_create_info_struct Referenced from: /System/Library/Frameworks/ ApplicationServices.framework/Versions/A/Frameworks/ImageIO.framework/ Versions/A/ImageIO Expected in: /Applications/sage/local/lib//libPng.dylib System python - looks good (and it works) 00:42 chi:lib.macosx-10.3-i386-2.5 506\ /usr/bin/python Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Jan 13 2009, 10:26:13) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5465)] on darwin Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. import _cublas ^D (Now this extension was built using the sage -python and I have it working fine on another box with sage python but a hand cranked framework python based sage from 3.1.1 ) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Mar 5, 2009, at 10:10 AM, Michel wrote: On Mar 5, 7:02 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: On Mar 5, 2009, at 5:27 AM, Michel wrote: Hi all, Maybe it is time for Sage to drop its ban on GPL3 code? This is a topic that we will certainly be revisiting in the future, but I see no reason it is imperative to do so now. As long as backwards compatibility is maintained with MPFR 3.0, it will be easy to create a newer spkg, and those stuck in GPL2-only land will fall behind. After all there is the lawsuit of Microsoft against TomTom. If Microsoft does not behave nicely with people using open source software there is zero reason to be nice to them. It is not a question of politics or personal opinions about Microsoft. The fact is that, as of right now at least, a lot of people out there are using Windows. Like it or not, In order to provide a viable alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica and Matlab we *need* a native Windows port. Microsoft Research is helping fund such a project, and we are reciprocating by providing something they can use. But as I understand it, it is Microsoft that is blocking the inclusion of GPL3 code into Sage (it was said on this list people paid by Microsoft are not allowed to run GPL3 code). It would be more correct to say that we are avoiding GPL3 code so that people we know (and even those we don't know) at Microsoft Research can continue to use Sage. Our hands aren't tied. In any case, back when the GPL3 license came out--well before anyone from Microsoft really entered the picture--there certainly was not an enthusiastic consensus to start using it (as documented in the archives). If that is indeed the case it seems Microsoft's help with the Windows port is not helpful at all On the contrary, it is very helpful. They're supporting people who otherwise wouldn't be able to devote as much time, if any, to making Sage a better project. I prefer to see the glass as half full-- someone at Microsoft thought Sage was good enough to support (and given their general stance on open source and the GPL in particular, that probably took a lot of internal persuading and string-pulling). On the other hand, I don't see how the GPL3 would help with the Windows port. In fact, there's little enough new, GPL3-only math code out there right now that we're really not missing out on much. Over time this will change and we need to periodically re-evaluate our position; this is why we require GPL2+, not GPL2-only, code. (Not too often though--as licensing discussions are often degenerate into long, flame-ridden wastes of time.) I would guess that sooner or later we will accept GPL3 packages into Sage, while still maintaining the GPL2-only version for a while (which will become more and more obsolete as GPL3 upstream packages evolve). Time will tell. - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: File location for pseudo-random number generator
On Mar 5, 2009, at 9:52 AM, Ryan Hinton wrote: William Stein wrote: On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Carl Witty carl.wi...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:35 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote: ... So I'm trying to implement a search algorithm similar to [1] for arbitrary word widths. Since the theory is based on matrices and polynomials over GF(2), Sage seems a good choice. But I need a place to put my file(s)! I do not understand the question. Do you plan to submit the code you write for inclusion in Sage? Here's what I understand; I'm sure Ryan will correct me if I'm wrong. Ryan is creating (for his research) a toolkit for finding parameters for WELL pseudo-random number generators (you can view the Mersenne twister as an instance of this class); in particular, he wants a PRNG with a basic word size of more than 32 bits. Since this is potentially generally useful, he wants to contribute this toolkit to Sage, for the use of other people who want to create their own WELL pseudo-random number generators. I think this does belong in Sage; it's obviously very specialized, but so is a lot of other stuff in Sage. The question is, where in the Sage directory tree does a toolkit for constructing new PRNGs belong? How about SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/sage/probability/various_name.py Thanks, Carl, for explaining what I want to do better than I did. :-) I considered the probability directory, but the what I know of (linear) PRNG theory has almost nothing in common with axiomatic probability. Instead, I'm puzzling over extension fields and matrices over GF(2) or GF(2^m), reduced bases of lattices of polynomials over GF(2), etc. Right now I have it in the misc directory, but I am happy to move it to the test area if it doesn't belong in the Sage main source. I hope it will be generally useful for creating pseudo-random noise generators with application-specific bit width, period, quality, and speed. I'm not sure exactly what your application is, but it might fit into either crypto or stats. - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Mar 5, 10:28 pm, Bill Hart goodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote: Let's clear up another misconception here. GPL v3+ software is NOT banned from Sage. This is explicitly stated online. Where does it say this? The comments on this thread suggest that Sage will not upgrade to the next release of MPFR solely because of the license change, which suggests that a de facto ban on GPL3 code is in place. It just doesn't get included in the GPL v2+ version of Sage, What do you mean, GPL v2+ version of Sage? Where can I download this version? As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. david --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Mar 6, 7:27 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: I would guess that sooner or later we will accept GPL3 packages into Sage, while still maintaining the GPL2-only version for a while (which will become more and more obsolete as GPL3 upstream packages evolve). Time will tell. I hope this is true. My worry is that Sage does not have the developer resources or willpower to maintain two separate versions. I think it will get harder and harder, especially with all the forking activity going on. david --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 5:21 AM, David Harvey dmhar...@cims.nyu.edu wrote: On Mar 6, 7:27 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu wrote: I would guess that sooner or later we will accept GPL3 packages into Sage, while still maintaining the GPL2-only version for a while (which will become more and more obsolete as GPL3 upstream packages evolve). Time will tell. I hope this is true. Sage already includes numerous GPL3 packages, such as GSL and GNUTLS + friends. My worry is that Sage does not have the developer resources or willpower to maintain two separate versions. I think it will get harder and harder, especially with all the forking activity going on. You need not worry, especially if you think about what the GPLv2-only version of Sage is actually for. Let's clear up another misconception here. GPL v3+ software is NOT banned from Sage. This is explicitly stated online. Where does it say this? Just look at Sage right now, which includes several GPLv3+ components. It is definitely a misconception that GPLv3+ software is banned from Sage. The comments on this thread suggest that Sage will not upgrade to the next release of MPFR solely because of the license change, which suggests that a de facto ban on GPL3 code is in place. That's not true. The comments on this thread suggest that there will be a version of Sage that includes only the GPLv2+ version of MPFR, and due to us actually caring about the quality of all versions of Sage we release, we will make an attempt at least to backport bugfixes. It just doesn't get included in the GPL v2+ version of Sage, What do you mean, GPL v2+ version of Sage? Where can I download this version? You can't. As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. It does. -- William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
William Stein wrote: As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. It does. So, to summarize, the version of Sage that is currently distributed is licensed, as a whole, as GPLv3? Thanks, Jason --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:10 AM, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote: William Stein wrote: As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. It does. So, to summarize, the version of Sage that is currently distributed is licensed, as a whole, as GPLv3? YES. -- William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage 3.2.3 os x 10.5 extension loading...
I take it from the resounding silence that this is not fixed on OS X - I read some other thread about this but seems like OS X is a PITA once again. Is there any hope? Do I give up now? Can I delete libPng.dylib? Help please! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage 3.2.3 os x 10.5 extension loading...
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:32 AM, seb s...@modelsciences.com wrote: I take it from the resounding silence that this is not fixed on OS X - I read some other thread about this but seems like OS X is a PITA once again. Is there any hope? Do I give up now? Can I delete libPng.dylib? Help please! Unfortunately, our resident expert on this sort of problem (Michael Abshoff) has the flu right now. You can certainly try deleting/moving libPng.dylib... -- William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage 3.2.3 os x 10.5 extension loading...
Sorry to hear that Michael has the 'flu. I renamed the linPng.dylib - and the problem is side stepped. How dependant is sage on this library? Can we live without it? What about a dummy library that provides the required symbol. You guys do a fantastic job of sorting all this DLL hell out. Thanks On Mar 6, 3:36 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:32 AM, seb s...@modelsciences.com wrote: I take it from the resounding silence that this is not fixed on OS X - I read some other thread about this but seems like OS X is a PITA once again. Is there any hope? Do I give up now? Can I delete libPng.dylib? Help please! Unfortunately, our resident expert on this sort of problem (Michael Abshoff) has the flu right now. You can certainly try deleting/moving libPng.dylib... -- William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:43 AM, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote: So, to summarize, the version of Sage that is currently distributed is licensed, as a whole, as GPLv3? YES. Okay, now I'm confused. Does that mean that http://windows.sagemath.org/ will not include GSL etc. and will only include the older MPFR, but the usual Sage will include all these things for the foreseeable future? No, that is *not* what this means.To clear up the FUD, here are some FACTS: 1. Sage can and does include substantial amounts of GPLv3 licensed code. 2. The version of Sage distributed at windows.sagemath.org can and will include GPLv3 code. 3. There will be a special version of the Sage at windows.sagemath.org that does not include any GPLv3 code, which is custom built for Microsoft. I assume this is a really dumb question with answer No, but explaining why the question is dumb would be helpful to me, since I don't (directly) use any of these packages, though presumably some package of this type is interwoven in the fabric of most everything that uses big integers or precise reals. If you have ever typed a decimal point into Sage, you have almost surely used MPFR. -- William --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: missing sphinxification
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 03:27:24AM -0800, Mike Hansen wrote: SNIP That being said, we should make an effort to get more included. I didn't convert any module that wasn't already in the reference manual since managing / rebasing patches against 400 files over 2 months of Sage releases was enough work as it is. I can make some improvements to my code which handles a large chunk of the conversion automatically, but it's also fairly easy to go through and convert things by hand. Btw: where can I find your script? Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry Isil nthi...@users.sf.net http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage-view, under emacs
Hi Nick!
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 01:15:54PM -0800, Nick Alexander wrote:
sage-mode-0.5.2 is up at http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-mode. It has
brief docs (very brief!) but you can now use sage-view-
{enable,disable}-inline-{plots,output} to toggle bits of behaviour.
In addition, multiple plots/output works better. Matthieu, you should
work with this one if you implement multiple sentinels for multiple
outputs.
Just wanted to take the occasion to finally thank you so much for
'rerun-sage', and the other improvements!
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry Isil nthi...@users.sf.net
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Unique Representation (was Bookshelf of standard object behaviors and datastructures)
Hi Robert, William, On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 01:43:23AM -0800, Robert Bradshaw wrote: On Mar 3, 2009, at 9:10 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: Dear Sage developers, Let me recycle this thread to report progress on the bookshelf of standard object behavior. I just posted a small patch: http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5120#comment:3 which implements sage.structure.UniqueRepresentation class. Derived classes inherit a unique representation behavior for their instances. Originates from sage.categories.category.uniq with: - Long doc (6 pages for 12 lines of code) - Default implementation of__eq__ and __hash__ - Handling of pickling in the simple cases - Avoids multiple calls to __init__ - Enables rewritings of the constructor argument This is a call for comments! (and reviews). If the principle is validated, it could be worthwhile to use it quite systematically for parents. I am a huge fan of uniqueness of parents. Any comments on how this relates to the code at http:// hg.sagemath.org/sage-main/file/b0aa7ef45b3c/sage/structure/factory.pyx ? Thanks for the pointer! There definitely a feature overlap, but not complete. UniqueRepresentation can be used by inheritance which has two advantages: - Setting up a policy for a full hierarchy of classes (for example, I will be able to enforce the policy that all CombinatorialFreeModule's have unique representation. Or I did take the decision that all categories have unique representation; well, this later decision deserves debate, but that's another story) - Hiding this as an implementation detail, and presenting a single gadget to the user, so that he can do: bla = Bla(x) isinstance(bla, Bla) rather than: bla = Bla(x) isinstace(bla, Bla_class) (no class name digging) On the other hand, there are a couple cool features only in UniqueFactory, and UniqueFactory has use cases not covered by UniqueRepresentation. So I think both should live (and be used systematically!!!), but features should be merged as much as possible. William: would you have time to work on this with me next week at MSRI? Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry Isil nthi...@users.sf.net http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
Thanks for the clarification. Some of us need it spelled out exactly in all the gory detail. If you have ever typed a decimal point into Sage, you have almost surely used MPFR. Which is why I figured it was a dumb question :) - kcrisman --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage-view, under emacs
On 6-Mar-09, at 8:30 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
Hi Nick!
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 01:15:54PM -0800, Nick Alexander wrote:
sage-mode-0.5.2 is up at http://wiki.sagemath.org/sage-mode. It has
brief docs (very brief!) but you can now use sage-view-
{enable,disable}-inline-{plots,output} to toggle bits of behaviour.
In addition, multiple plots/output works better. Matthieu, you
should
work with this one if you implement multiple sentinels for multiple
outputs.
Just wanted to take the occasion to finally thank you so much for
'rerun-sage', and the other improvements!
You are very welcome. Matthias also sent a much improved version of
sage-view that I have yet to put on the wiki; sorry Matthias!
Nick
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Reduced basis for lattice of polynomials over GF(2)
Thanks in advance for any help. Please let me know if I'm producing too much noise on the list. I'm still working on the pseudo-random number generators. To verify a certain property (maximal equidistribution) [1], it is equivalent [2,3] to finding a Minkowski-reduced basis for a lattice over polynomials with coefficients in GF(2) (specifically, the non-zero point with the smallest maximum polynomial degree). They give [4] as an example of an algorithm that will do the trick. I'm stuck. I have not yet found a copy of [4], but from the abstract it sounds like the reduced lattice basis is a means to the title of the paper, factoring multivariate polynomials over finite fields. On IRC, Carl Witty suggested that the LLL algorithm sounded similar, but for integers. I haven't figured out how to frame my polynomial lattice problem as an integer lattice problem, though. So, question #1. Does anyone know if Sage does this? Question #2. Does anyone have electronic access to article [4] or an improved algorithm to do this basis reduction? The ScienceDirect link for the Lenstra article is is http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-(85)90016-9. Thanks! References: Most of these are on Dr. L'Ecuyer's website, http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~lecuyer/papers.html [1] F. Panneton, P. L'Ecuyer, and M. Matsumoto, ``Improved Long-Period Generators Based on Linear Recurrences Modulo 2'', ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 32, 1 (2006), 1-16. [2] P. L'Ecuyer and F. Panneton, ``F_2-Linear Random Number Generators'', 2007, to appear with minor revisions in Advancing the Frontiers of Simulation: A Festschrift in Honor of George S. Fishman. GERAD Report 2007-21. [3] R. Couture and P. L'Ecuyer, ``Lattice Computations for Random Numbers'', Mathematics of Computation, 69, 230 (2000), 757--765. [4] A. K. Lenstra. Factoring multivariate polynomials over finite fields. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 30:235–248, 1985. --- Ryan Hinton PhD candidate, Electrical Engineering University of Virginia --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Mar 6, 9:49 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. It does. Ah. So am I correct in deducing that MSR employees are unable to use Sage 3.3? david --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On Mar 6, 2009, at 10:15 AM, David Harvey wrote: On Mar 6, 9:49 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote: As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. It does. Ah. So am I correct in deducing that MSR employees are unable to use Sage 3.3? They can't just go to the website and download the one that's there. They can use 3.3 if they replace several spkgs by older versions. (I'm not sure how supported this is at the moment, but that is the intent.) The Sage library code itself is still GPLv2+. - Robert --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage 3.2.3 os x 10.5 extension loading...
Hi, AFAIK, the patch at trac #5217 (and other paches mentioned there) should have resolved this long standing OS X libpng annoyance --- all that went into Sage 3.3rc1. I'd propose to wait until Sage 3.4 binaries are out, or to download and build Sage 3.3 from source (which is pretty forward --- but for 3.3 no binaries were/are provided for download). Hopefully Michael takes his time to really recover, best wishes!!! Cheers, gsw --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
On 6 Mar, 13:15, David Harvey dmhar...@cims.nyu.edu wrote: On Mar 5, 10:28 pm, Bill Hart goodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote: Let's clear up another misconception here. GPL v3+ software is NOT banned from Sage. This is explicitly stated online. Where does it say this? It's actually been stated a number of times in threads on this list. In the last few days it was reiterated that the Windows port will *allow* GPL v3+ software. Probably there is a little bit of confusion between two issues: * The Windows port of Sage - which MSR is paying for * The MSR special release of Sage - which will be GPL v2+ They are totally separate. Thus there is no restriction on GPL v3 stuff in even the Windows port, let alone the other versions of Sage. But that's ok. It is just a matter of getting the word out, which hopefully this thread will help with. The comments on this thread suggest that Sage will not upgrade to the next release of MPFR solely because of the license change, which suggests that a de facto ban on GPL3 code is in place. That may appear to be the implication, but it isn't. It just makes it more difficult for the people putting together the MSR GPL v2+ version. It just doesn't get included in the GPL v2+ version of Sage, What do you mean, GPL v2+ version of Sage? Where can I download this version? If it were that easy, we'd already have a link for you. At present, all I can say is if you download all the GPL v2+ pieces and none of the GPL v3+ pieces, you have the GPL v2+ version of Sage. If it doesn't compile for you, please send a patch. It's an ongoing effort. Significant progress has been made! Fortunately only a handful of projects have switched licenses, making this work less troublesome. Some GNU projects and that is about it as far as I can tell. As far as I know, there is only one Sage download available, and it does not include any GPL3 code. That hasn't been true for quite a while, well not if you mean to include LGPL v3. GMP went LGPL v3 when it was still in Sage. There are other packages in Sage (which won't be in the GPL v2+ version) which are (L)GPL v3+. My point was not that Sage won't distribute GPLv3+ software, but that it is unfortunate if open source mathematical projects are switching to GPL v3+ purely because of misinformation. Somehow there is the perception that GPL v3+ is a magic bullet against being sued by Microsoft. We've got protection, double crossed, no returns, nyah, nyah. The misinformation is that GPL v3+ contains clauses to penalise patent aggression and that the GPL v2+ does not. So the perception is that if we license our code GPL v3+ it keeps us safe from the raving monster. Actually, some of the patent clauses that were going to be added to v3 were scrapped before the final draft. What remains is section 11 of GPL v3 which basically says that if a contributor gives you code and they have patents related to it, they don't take away any of the free software rights you would have had otherwise, from the contribution. In patent language they grant you a royalty free patent license. It then has some specifics about extending that license to downstream recipients, etc. Finally it restricts deals with software companies who want you to distribute software with a discriminatory patent (one which prevents you from fulfilling the requirements of the GPL). And specifically it looks like *you* have to be paying money *to* that software company in order to fall afoul of that restriction. *But* section 7 of the GPL v2 already dealt with patent issues and essentially says that in the case of a patent conflict with the terms of the license, you have to stop distributing the software. It explicitly says that you cannot use a patent issue to excuse you from your obligations with regard to the license, the intention being to *protect the integrity of the free software distribution system*. As you can see from reading both, neither gives you protection if you choose to distribute software which violates someone's patent. You can't distribute software under the GPL under those conditions. One also sees that both versions of the license are clear about situations like the MS vs TomTom one. *IF* MS's patent claims are upheld, it makes no difference which version of the license is used, TomTom will have to stop distribution under the GPL. It's ironic that TomTom is not even an open source software company, but a proprietary GPS hardware navigation company. The whole TomTom issue is irrelevant to Open Source mathematics. The other thing which is important to note is that a recent court case in the US set a precedent that software patents are only enforceable when associated with a specific device (a general computer not being applicable). Thus MS could not go after an open source software project as such, but could potentially go after a hardware company who is using open source software as a system for accomplishing something which MS have a patent
[sage-devel] Re: Fwd: [MPFR] new license for GNU MPFR
Hmmm okay, it looks like I have been guilty of contributing to some of the misinformation on this thread. My apologies for this. david --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Reduced basis for lattice of polynomials over GF(2)
PS There is also a version of this by Pauli in 1998 ANTS: http://www.springerlink.com/content/hc6nln8ghvgctl6m/ 2009/3/6 John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com: Sage does not do this as far as I know but my student David Roberts implemented it in Magma for his thesis. He was following an alternative treatment by Mulders and Storjohann (the latter spoke at Sage Days in Nancy) since I did not know Arjen Lenstra's essentially equivalent formulation until I gave a talk in Leiden with Hendrik L in the audience ;). The algorithm is the same for polynomial lattices over any field, but in the smae way as for polynomial gcd and the Euclidean Algorithm, it works better over some fields than others (e.g. finite fields good, rationals bad). I would guess that it could be implemented more efficiently over GF(2). John Cremona PS See http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/J.E.Cremona/theses/index.html for the thesis (it's the last one) PS I have paper copy (only) of the Lenstra paper 2009/3/6 Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com: Thanks in advance for any help. Please let me know if I'm producing too much noise on the list. I'm still working on the pseudo-random number generators. To verify a certain property (maximal equidistribution) [1], it is equivalent [2,3] to finding a Minkowski-reduced basis for a lattice over polynomials with coefficients in GF(2) (specifically, the non-zero point with the smallest maximum polynomial degree). They give [4] as an example of an algorithm that will do the trick. I'm stuck. I have not yet found a copy of [4], but from the abstract it sounds like the reduced lattice basis is a means to the title of the paper, factoring multivariate polynomials over finite fields. On IRC, Carl Witty suggested that the LLL algorithm sounded similar, but for integers. I haven't figured out how to frame my polynomial lattice problem as an integer lattice problem, though. So, question #1. Does anyone know if Sage does this? Question #2. Does anyone have electronic access to article [4] or an improved algorithm to do this basis reduction? The ScienceDirect link for the Lenstra article is is http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-(85)90016-9. Thanks! References: Most of these are on Dr. L'Ecuyer's website, http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~lecuyer/papers.html [1] F. Panneton, P. L'Ecuyer, and M. Matsumoto, ``Improved Long-Period Generators Based on Linear Recurrences Modulo 2'', ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 32, 1 (2006), 1-16. [2] P. L'Ecuyer and F. Panneton, ``F_2-Linear Random Number Generators'', 2007, to appear with minor revisions in Advancing the Frontiers of Simulation: A Festschrift in Honor of George S. Fishman. GERAD Report 2007-21. [3] R. Couture and P. L'Ecuyer, ``Lattice Computations for Random Numbers'', Mathematics of Computation, 69, 230 (2000), 757--765. [4] A. K. Lenstra. Factoring multivariate polynomials over finite fields. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 30:235–248, 1985. --- Ryan Hinton PhD candidate, Electrical Engineering University of Virginia --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: mayavi in sage, howto
Ondrej Certik wrote: Hi, I spent last couple days figuring out how to get mayavi2 installed into Sage, using offscreen rendering (e.g. so that you can use mayavi from ipython over ssh, without X), so that it can be used in the notebook easily. It was a lot of pain, so here is the howto so that you can build on my work: [...] This would not be possible without Prabhu and Gael, who both fixed things almost immediatelly after I reported them, thanks a lot! And thanks also to Jaap, who have helped me a lot over IRC and prepared the original packages that I just customized to work offscreen using Prabhu tips, thanks Jaap, it helped me a lot. Some questions: 1) Do you need more than just mayavi2 from the ETS? If you only need mayavi2 there are a lot less dependencies: only vtk and wxPython IIRC. 2) Why do you need vtk-cvs (vtk-5.3)? Is vtk-5.2.1 failing somehow? 3) Why do you install your own osmesa? Can't you trust a standard system wide install? Cheers, Jaap Ondrej --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] substituting values into symbolic vectors
Does anyone see what is causing the error here?
sage: var('x,y')
(x, y)
sage: v=vector([x,y,x^2+y])
sage: v.subs(x=1,y=2)
---
ValueErrorTraceback (most recent call last)
/home/grout/.sage/temp/good/23967/_home_grout__sage_init_sage_0.py in
module()
/home/grout/sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/structure/element.so
in sage.structure.element.Element.subs (sage/structure/element.c:3320)()
369 else:
370 variables.append(gen)
-- 371 return self(*variables)
372
373 def n(self, prec=None, digits=None):
/home/grout/sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/modules/free_module_element.so
in
sage.modules.free_module_element.FreeModuleElement_generic_dense.__call__
(sage/modules/free_module_element.c:13987)()
/home/grout/sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/calculus/calculus.pyc
in __call__(self, *args, **kwds)
1789 d[ vars[i] ] = args[i]
1790 except IndexError:
- 1791 raise ValueError, the number of arguments
must be less than or equal to %s%len(self.variables())
1792
1793 return self.substitute(d, **kwds)
ValueError: the number of arguments must be less than or equal to 1
I think it traces back to trying to basically call the first expression
(x) with arguments 1 and 2, resulting in the same error message as:
sage: f=x
sage: f(1,2)
---
ValueErrorTraceback (most recent call last)
/home/grout/.sage/temp/good/23967/_home_grout__sage_init_sage_0.py in
module()
/home/grout/sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/calculus/calculus.pyc
in __call__(self, *args, **kwds)
1789 d[ vars[i] ] = args[i]
1790 except IndexError:
- 1791 raise ValueError, the number of arguments
must be less than or equal to %s%len(self.variables())
1792
1793 return self.substitute(d, **kwds)
ValueError: the number of arguments must be less than or equal to 1
I guess my questions are:
1. Is my analysis of the error correct?
2. Why is it not just calling the .subs method for each component of the
vector? Is there something tricky that is going on here that I'm missing?
Thanks,
Jason
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Post-tutorial thoughts
Hello, I recently finished the tutorial for Sage 3.2.3 and had a few questions, comments, and suggestions that I've rolled into one easy-to-delete post. :) My field is not mathematics, but most of my thoughts below relate to the user experience in Sage. Some are simply requests for [pointers to and/or improvements upon] features that I have found useful in MapLABica [1] and similar programs. Others are specific to Sage's original approach to mathematical software. A quick disclaimer: Sage is still very new to me, so my thoughts are born largely of naivete. In particular, I have minimal exposure to the changes in v3.3 and none to v3.4.*. Further, I don't claim any originality. Also, the classification below is rough. HELP * How about adding a Google-style search box in the notebook interface? Pressing tab after command?, which is definitely useful, doesn't always work well, because it can interrupt the flow of a worksheet. For example, if I decide not to use the command there, or if I wish to evaluate the cell first, then I need to erase what I just typed. Similarly, if I used a new cell for the search, it often gets in the way, etc. With a search box, operator keywords (e.g., doc:, example:) could offer complex queries without adding or modifying a cell. Or a pull down menu could select among search_*(). I'm not sure where the box itself should go, but it would be nice not to have to scroll to use it. Perhaps it can float in a corner, or appear to the right of the evaluate which appears below the most recently active input cell. Optionally, the box could replace evaluate. If remote access is OK, and instant indexing is not essential, then there is Google Custom Search, which is free and ad-free for non-profit and educational sites, apparently: http://www.google.com/support/customsearch/bin/answer.py?answer=70354topic=11497 By the way, it could just be time for me to upgrade my machine, but it seems that recent results from search_*() are not cached. This might be important in server settings or to individuals who do a lot of searching. * [How about adding] A frame-based Help Browser which opens in its own tab. [?] * Close buttons on help popups. Perhaps also a Move to a new tab or Move to Help Browser button. * Scrollbars for very long help pop-ups and/or an option which tells search_*() to open/reuse a tab or jump to a Help Browser tab. For the Sage console, an analogue of R's help.start() could fire up a web browser. * Tab completion for help on operators: *?, //?, etc. * Just as clicking to the left of an output cell can hide it, a similar feature could be useful for long pop-up docs, with extended examples and TESTS available but hidden by default. * It would be great if the documentation had a SEE ALSO section. Please note: I'm not familiar with the ReST transition, which may already address some or all of these. LAYOUT * Is there a shorthand for print besides def p(d): print d? Even something like %print, a sort of cell-local verbose setting? * A check box for typeset output is missing in the interactive tutorial, at least for v3.2.3. * A shortcut for inserting a new cell below the current cell, without evaluating the current cell. I think this is already somewhere on Trac. It may not be practical in the notebook, but I miss Maple's Control-j/k for inserting new lines of input. * Evaluating a cell at the bottom edge of worksheet tab/window should [optionally] scroll down more than just to the bottom edge of the next cell. Also, a help pop-up down here is initially almost completely hidden. * Optionally, automatically transpose tall-and-narrow output, e.g., from Somematrixgroup.conjugacy_class_representatives(), and use a horizontal scrollbar in the cell to save [vertical] space. * An option to suppress evaluate under input cells. * Are there already scripts which can generate custom stylesheets for Sage? Or can we easily use the output from jQuery's UI ThemeRoller: http://www.themeroller.com/ ? Given the complexity of CSS, my hope here is to convert a smallish set of input parameters --- a few base colors, say, plus a bit of color theory, if it helps --- into an approximately usable color scheme. Ultimately, this could make it easier to add a school's emblem and colors to the notebook (rebrand). There is a related Trac ticket: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3733 * A quick note about v3.3's TinyMCE @ sagenb.org: It's great! I use a Minimum Font Size of 18 in Firefox, which makes the text in the Paragraph, Font family, and Font size pull-downs too large. Perhaps there is a way for TinyMCE to override my browser's setting, selectively. This is not a big deal, although it is irksome that so many high-traffic sites don't accommodate such departures from their norm. No problems with sagemath.org! META * Take the conjugate-transpose of a matrix using ', as in MATLAB. Pre-parse? * A Sage map() which
[sage-devel] Re: Post-tutorial thoughts
I'm only going to comment on a couple of points here (mostly because I
never use the notebook).
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Pat LeSmithe qed...@gmail.com wrote:
* Take the conjugate-transpose of a matrix using ', as in MATLAB.
Pre-parse?
Sounds tricky to combine with Python's string syntax, which can also use '.
(Probably it technically wouldn't conflict, because a string can't
appear in a postfix-operator position.)
* A Sage map() which works quickly and transparently for functions and
operators on sequences of general structures?
Sounds like a good idea.
* User-defined or simply more % modes, particularly for implicit
computation within structures. For instance, %integermodring(23) at the
top of a cell could tell Sage to use mod-23 arithmetic in the cell,
except where explicitly indicated otherwise.
Interesting idea. You can probably emulate this example by putting:
Integer = Integers(23)
at the beginning of your cell, and
reset('Integer')
at the end. (This works at the command line; I haven't tested it in
the notebook.)
* How to forget a specific assignment, e.g., y = 3, especially if it's
big, without restarting?
reset('y')
Carl
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Post-tutorial thoughts
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Carl Witty carl.wi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm only going to comment on a couple of points here (mostly because I
never use the notebook).
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Pat LeSmithe qed...@gmail.com wrote:
* Take the conjugate-transpose of a matrix using ', as in MATLAB.
Pre-parse?
Sounds tricky to combine with Python's string syntax, which can also use '.
(Probably it technically wouldn't conflict, because a string can't
appear in a postfix-operator position.)
* A Sage map() which works quickly and transparently for functions and
operators on sequences of general structures?
Sounds like a good idea.
* User-defined or simply more % modes, particularly for implicit
computation within structures. For instance, %integermodring(23) at the
top of a cell could tell Sage to use mod-23 arithmetic in the cell,
except where explicitly indicated otherwise.
Interesting idea. You can probably emulate this example by putting:
Integer = Integers(23)
at the beginning of your cell, and
reset('Integer')
at the end. (This works at the command line; I haven't tested it in
the notebook.)
If you paste this input an input cell and press shift-enter, then
Sage will do *exactly* what you requested, i.e., %integermodring(23)
will work!
class integermodring:
def __init__(self, modulus):
self.modulus = modulus
def eval(self, s, globals, locals):
_temp = locals['Integer']
locals['Integer'] = IntegerModRing(self.modulus)
ans = python.eval(preparse(s), globals, locals)
locals['Integer'] = _temp
return ans
Cool, eh?
* How to forget a specific assignment, e.g., y = 3, especially if it's
big, without restarting?
reset('y')
Carl
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: Reduced basis for lattice of polynomials over GF(2)
Thank you very much for the pointers! I'll try the thesis and online paper you mentioned in your follow-up email. If I really need the Lenstra paper I'll try plying the librarian with brownies or something. Thanks again! - Ryan John Cremona wrote: Sage does not do this as far as I know but my student David Roberts implemented it in Magma for his thesis. He was following an alternative treatment by Mulders and Storjohann (the latter spoke at Sage Days in Nancy) since I did not know Arjen Lenstra's essentially equivalent formulation until I gave a talk in Leiden with Hendrik L in the audience ;). The algorithm is the same for polynomial lattices over any field, but in the smae way as for polynomial gcd and the Euclidean Algorithm, it works better over some fields than others (e.g. finite fields good, rationals bad). I would guess that it could be implemented more efficiently over GF(2). John Cremona PS See http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/J.E.Cremona/theses/index.html for the thesis (it's the last one) PS I have paper copy (only) of the Lenstra paper 2009/3/6 Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com: Thanks in advance for any help. Please let me know if I'm producing too much noise on the list. I'm still working on the pseudo-random number generators. To verify a certain property (maximal equidistribution) [1], it is equivalent [2,3] to finding a Minkowski-reduced basis for a lattice over polynomials with coefficients in GF(2) (specifically, the non-zero point with the smallest maximum polynomial degree). They give [4] as an example of an algorithm that will do the trick. I'm stuck. I have not yet found a copy of [4], but from the abstract it sounds like the reduced lattice basis is a means to the title of the paper, factoring multivariate polynomials over finite fields. On IRC, Carl Witty suggested that the LLL algorithm sounded similar, but for integers. I haven't figured out how to frame my polynomial lattice problem as an integer lattice problem, though. So, question #1. Does anyone know if Sage does this? Question #2. Does anyone have electronic access to article [4] or an improved algorithm to do this basis reduction? The ScienceDirect link for the Lenstra article is is http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-(85)90016-9. Thanks! References: Most of these are on Dr. L'Ecuyer's website, http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~lecuyer/papers.html [1] F. Panneton, P. L'Ecuyer, and M. Matsumoto, ``Improved Long-Period Generators Based on Linear Recurrences Modulo 2'', ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 32, 1 (2006), 1-16. [2] P. L'Ecuyer and F. Panneton, ``F_2-Linear Random Number Generators'', 2007, to appear with minor revisions in Advancing the Frontiers of Simulation: A Festschrift in Honor of George S. Fishman. GERAD Report 2007-21. [3] R. Couture and P. L'Ecuyer, ``Lattice Computations for Random Numbers'', Mathematics of Computation, 69, 230 (2000), 757--765. [4] A. K. Lenstra. Factoring multivariate polynomials over finite fields. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 30:235–248, 1985. --- Ryan Hinton PhD candidate, Electrical Engineering University of Virginia --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] review request: add charset=utf8 to notebook pages, etc
I'd like someone who knows the notebook code and Twisted to take a look at tickets #4547 and #5211. Problems occur because the notebook doesn't specify an encoding for the html pages it generates: see http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/t/3d4b400f5afe66fb . In #5211, the patch adds a content-type header to all the html pages generated by the notebook -- or tries to; I need someone who knows the code better to make sure everything is covered. Ticket #4547 was originally just to add content-type headers to Twisted's HTTP responses; I added a charset specification. Again, I need someone who knows the code better to make sure things work. I propose that, if these patches fix the bulk of the encoding issues, that we merge them and open new tickets for specifying content-type of CSS and Javscript files and so on. So, please review and comment! Dan -- --- Dan Drake dr...@kaist.edu - KAIST Department of Mathematical Sciences --- http://mathsci.kaist.ac.kr/~drake signature.asc Description: Digital signature
[sage-devel] Re: mayavi in sage, howto
On 03/07/09 01:45, Jaap Spies wrote: Some questions: 1) Do you need more than just mayavi2 from the ETS? If you only need mayavi2 there are a lot less dependencies: only vtk and wxPython IIRC. In addition, you can install mayavi2 without any dependency on Envisage or the traits UI backends (i.e. no wxPython + TraitsBackendWX +Envisage*) -- the trouble in that approach is that you will only get the offscreen capabilities and none of the UI goodies even if you want them for some reason outside a notebook. But I would imagine this is a useful case for some. The way to get that with standard Python is to simply do: easy_install Mayavi. This should only pull in the basic package. If you do easy_install Mayavi[app], it pulls in the other components for the UI/app. 2) Why do you need vtk-cvs (vtk-5.3)? Is vtk-5.2.1 failing somehow? I guess 5.2.1 would work but I did the experimentation with the build on VTK cvs which is what I had handy. Ondrej also commented out a few warning lines in his spkg. I'll try and get that into VTK cvs before 5.4 is released (CVS is currently frozen). 3) Why do you install your own osmesa? Can't you trust a standard system wide install? Simply because it did not work for some reason. I suspect that the standard system wide install builds with dri and that for some currently unfathomable reason does not work cleanly with osmesa -- instead bundling your own mesa+osmesa almost always works. Overall, if there is a user base for the full UI and the offscreen, perhaps two separate bundles might be useful. cheers, prabhu --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-devel] Re: sage 3.2.3 os x 10.5 extension loading...
On Mar 6, 11:29 am, Georg S. Weber georgswe...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, AFAIK, the patch at trac #5217 (and other paches mentioned there) should have resolved this long standing OS X libpng annoyance --- all that went into Sage 3.3rc1. I'd propose to wait until Sage 3.4 binaries are out, or to download and build Sage 3.3 from source (which is pretty forward --- but for 3.3 no binaries were/are provided for download). Yeah, the issue is fixed in Sage 3.3 since we now link against libpng12 instead of libpng to avoid symbol collisions with Apple's IOKit. Hopefully Michael takes his time to really recover, best wishes!!! Cheers, gsw Cheers, Michael --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
