[sage-support] Code Highlighting
Hey, is there an easy way to highlight the code somehow in the cell (maybe with an add-on)? This would be fantastic! Greets, Stefan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Sage performance on moderate price desktops
I'm about to get a new desktop for home, and I wonder if there are any suggestions on what type of fairly low end systems would be best at running Sage. (I don't plan to spend more than $1,000 for box itself.) I have noticed that Sage actually runs faster on my laptop, which has a single 1.8 Gig processor, than it does on my current desktop, which has two 2.8 Gig processors. I don't really expect to get use of both the processors for computations, but still it seems weird that I get better performance on the laptop. Anyway, I just thought somebody might have comments on which current hardware would be a good bet for sage in the economy price range. (Say $500 - $750 NOT including display and so on.) -Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: Sage performance on moderate price desktops
It completely depends on what sort of computations you do. That said, for the price range you are talking about I would focus on getting enough memory - perhaps 4 GB. -M. Hampton On Nov 15, 5:13 pm, Mike Witt wrote: > I'm about to get a new desktop for home, and I wonder if there are any > suggestions on what type of fairly low end systems would be best at > running Sage. (I don't plan to spend more than $1,000 for box itself.) > > I have noticed that Sage actually runs faster on my laptop, which has > a single 1.8 Gig processor, than it does on my current desktop, which > has two 2.8 Gig processors. I don't really expect to get use of both > the processors for computations, but still it seems weird that I get > better performance on the laptop. > > Anyway, I just thought somebody might have comments on which current > hardware would be a good bet for sage in the economy price range. (Say > $500 - $750 NOT including display and so on.) > > -Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[sage-support] Re: plot3d can't handle log(0)
I was looking into this issue this afternoon, and its more complicated
than it might appear at first. Removing a point in a 2D plot is
relatively simple, but when you remove a point in a 3D plot you could
be affecting several faces. There is also the matter that evaluation
is separate from triangulation, so you have to find out how to
communicate the fact that a vertex doesn't exist between the two
stages (since ParametricSurface usually assumes it has a uniform
grid).
If during evaluation you could set the vertex coordinates at a non-
existent point to be some kind of special NaN value, you could omit
that vertex later during triangulation. Does anyone know how you could
get at such a NaN value for Cython doubles?
- Bill
On Nov 10, 12:34 pm, kcrisman wrote:
> In 4.2.1.alpha0:
>
> sage: f(x,y)=ln(x)
> sage: P=plot3d(f,(x,0,1),(y,0,1))
> sage: P
> ERROR: An unexpected error occurred while tokenizing input
> The following traceback may be corrupted or invalid
> The error message is: ('EOF in multi-line statement', (16,0))
> ---
> ValueError Traceback (most recent call
> last)
>
> ValueError: math domain error
>
> Switch to (x,0.1,1), and all is well. I am pretty sure the problem is
> that line 404 in plot/plot3d/parametric_surface.pyx doesn't have an
> exception handler forlog(0) or other such nan type values:
>
> sage: math.log(0)
>
> ValueError: math domain error
>
> But in the plotting context, it's silly not to just ignore this; we
> check for things like this all the time:
> sage: plot(log,0,1)
>
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know enough about C/Cython to fix this. For
> now it would probably be enough to fix it for the z variable. This is
> now #7423. Any takers, or hints as to how to fix this? Thanks!
>
> - kcrisman
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
