[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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---