> I forgot to time it. :( It's a dual-core 2.2 GHz box with 4 GB of RAM,
> so I think it's under an hour.
That'd be cool. The 2005 version took like 10 hours for me, but maybe
I was doing something wrong.
Ondrej
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-
On Feb 4, 2008 3:43 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The November 2007 release of Axiom is now in Gentoo's Portage repository
> for testing. The previous version was the September 2005 tarball! I have
> it running on my Athlon64 X2, but I haven't heard whether it runs on the
On Jan 21, 2008 9:30 PM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>Suppose you have software A which has very few documentation and it has
> >>a bug B.
> >>
> >>You can produce from that two systems A1 and A2.
> >>
> >>A1: Fix the bug today. Fix the documentation in 1 year.
> >>A2: Fix the bug together w
On Dec 25, 2007 1:38 AM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I just noticed this email on the jmol developer mailing list. See below.
> >
> >if anybody has any thoughts or ideas -- long or short term -- about how to
> >structure or restructure sage development so the same sort of thing doesn't
>
On Dec 9, 2007 3:57 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> William,
>
> Axiom includes a standalone, 2D and 3D graphics program. The program
> can be used independently from Axiom or directly inside Axiom. It
> pops up a separate window normally so you can manipulate the output
> (shade, rotate, etc). T
On 9/18/07, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>
> | That said, of
> | course I wouldn't like it, when someone forks a project that I started
> | and worked for a
> I have no objection to your participation in this mailing list but...
>
> > Then [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the answer :-)
>
> It is inappropriate behavior to advertise or advocate your project
> on this mailing list. You have private email as well as your own
> project mailing list. Please do not do t
> I started open source programming in the late 90s and was quite
> idealistic about the whole idea, contributing to other projects
> and starting my own project (Pinger).
>
> In the last few months I've gotten quite cynical. I don't see the
> sense of community, cooperation, and selfless assistanc
> Typing help is ambiguous if you first type:
>
> help(x) == x
>
> followed by
>
> help Fraction
>
> but is not ambiguous if you type
>
> )help Fraction
>
> The lack of the student interest in learning parsing techniques is annoying
> and shows a lack of interest in computer science.
I am a
> | So it cannot go to the Debian main distribution, and that of course is
> | a major problem, at least for me.
>
> The linux distribution I've been for a decade now has a button that
> let me install "non-open source" software of highly practical value to me.
The technical thing is not a problem
> Certainly there are since there are some people using Aldor now and
> none of these would qualify as commercial as fas as I know.
>
> Can you suggest a credible commercial use? Do you know of any
> commercial use of Axiom? I dont think this is really the issue. The
> problem as I see it is lack o
I think this quote from Karl Fogel's book (http://producingoss.com/)
answers your question:
The transience, or rather the potential transience, of relationships
is perhaps the single most daunting task facing a new project. What
will persuade all these people to stick together long enough to
prod
On 7/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Scratchpad was a research project, not a commercial project.
The only reason that it became commercial was that Lou Gerstner,
hired from Nabisco to run IBM, set out to commercialize everything.
I'd like to blame Lou for everything but the c
Greetings!
Just update /etc/apt/sources.list accordingly and
apt-get source axiom
Yes, but that is the one, which is already in Debian, which is old. I
meant the one we will be working on. Or do you have some private
repository?
Ondrej
___
Axiom-d
3) I'm hoping the existing contents of debian/ will need little
change, and only simplification. I of course welcome any
suggestions/patches thereto from Ondrej or others interested.
Is there any reason it won't just work as is?
Do you have the Debian repository somewhere? (The one whi
This has been debated extensively on this list and there are other
people here who agree with you, most notably Bill Page, which is why
he asked the question. This view implicitly assumes that users have
tools like apt-get and yum which can resolve dependencies. At least
one of my systems is still
Technically, Axiom doesn't depend on "a separately released version of
gcl" since, as I read it a "dependency" implies that someone needs to
do an apt-get for gcl and have the dependency listed in the rpm. We
don't need to do this since Gold, at least, cannot use an external gcl.
If Camm and Ondr
GCL is stable enough for Axiom in the versions we are using.
The current Gold version of Axiom uses GCL-2.6.8pre2 which works
fine everywhere. The current Debian version uses GCL-2.6.7 which
will still work for Axiom. So I don't believe that GCL on Debian
will be an issue at all.
Great. So ther
Were it only that simple. Typically, many, many failures are required
to get a working build on a lesser known machine. gcl/axiom flushes
out instabilities in gcc, binutils, and several other very low-level
parts of the toolchain. That said, getting all the builds working
flushes out bugs in gc
When we promote silver to the gold version I will be pushing out a
new stable release to all of the sites. If Ondrej and you are able
to help we can also bring the Debian version up to date at that time.
We can put the axiom debian things into the svn.debian.org, so that we
can both access it an
Of course, it could be argued that portability to all these machines
is not all that important, in which case we can configure the package
accordingly.
I am just curious - isn't it a problem for Debian build servers, that
the package builts for 12 hours or even more?
Ondrej
__
Ondrej,
As noted, Camm both did the prior port and sponsored Axiom.
If we can do the port I believe he can be asked to sponsor it.
OK. When you merge the repositories and make a release, let me know
which exact version you would like to have in Debian and if Camm
doesn't have time to update the
Camm Maguire did the debian version. As far as I'm aware Camm is the
only debian-committer on this mailing list. Debian has a whole series
of constraints and rules which make it a challenge to maintain. It is
true that Debian would give Axiom considerably more exposure.
Are you a debian-committer
Hi,
yes, I think Axiom should have just one official branch and it should
just work. And that official branch should be the one in Debian (it
will get to Ubuntu automatically) and other distributions that people
use. This way the possible new contributors will know, that their
patch, if accepted
Le mercredi 13 juin 2007 à 11:51 +0200, Ondrej Certik a écrit :
> > nothing, just have a look at
> > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2007-06/msg00192.html
> > except for 64 bit, you are in exactly the same situation as I was ...
>
> Thanks very much, tha
nothing, just have a look at
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2007-06/msg00192.html
except for 64 bit, you are in exactly the same situation as I was ...
Thanks very much, that helped a lot. Here are the steps, that worked
for me, but still I get some error at the end (I look
Hi,
the usual question these days - I installed aldor from aldor.org and
then compiled axiom from wh-sandbox using commands:
cd ~/extprograms
svn co https://axiom.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/axiom/branches/wh-sandbox
wh-sandbox
cd wh-sandbox
./configure
make
then I did:
export AXIOM=$HOME/extp
I see. I am not interested in mathematics (for this there is Axiom),
but just a basic symbolic manipulation and for this the algorithms are
not difficult and are well-known. And it's really not difficult to
code them. The time consuming part is the interface and that is imho
quite different from A
language for Axiom as part of the basic design. Even Sage has
a front-end pre-processor to make Python more "friendly" for
math users and it has forked a version of Pyrex as it's
"compiled" language. So I am saying this as a caution: Just
And also I disagree with their decision in this. :)
bec
#x27;s list of possible projects), I am forwarding the
following email concerning SymPy. As you will read, a total
of 5 applications were accepted for SymPy related projects!
But first I would like to sincerely congratulate Ondrej Certik
for obtaining such a large response to the SymPy project. I
th
Expressions containing algebraic functions, in particular roots.
AFAICS SymPy does not support RootOf operation.
I see. No, RootOf is not yet supported.
Ondrej
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailm
I created another example in the Sandbox to show how to compute a
limit in SymPy, as this is probably the only feature of SymPy that can
be interesting, from the algorithms point of view.
Another easy way to play with SymPy is just to download it and start
bin/isympy. No installation is needed, j
| Compare for example GiNaC and SymPy's
| implementation of the same algorithms - SymPy is like 1/2 (or even
| more) smaller, because C++ is very, very verbose.
Now, you're elevating the properties of a particular library to that
of a language and language library. I'll refrain from qualifying t
I would like to see a head-to-head comparison. If you need some help
with understanding the code, just ask.
Ondrej
On 3/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is your python algebra code available?
It might be an interesting exercise to rewrite it into spad
and see a head-to-head c
Is it possible to use Axiom from C++? Then it could also be used from
Python. But I fear that the only easy way of doing it is through
"string interface", like SAGE does for Maple for example.
Ondrej
On 30 Mar 2007 15:17:36 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, SymPy is here:
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/
and the only think it can do now better than axiom is limits. Yes, it
ignores many special cases, but on the other hand it does work for the
most common cases, like power simplifications and simple limits (all
in Demidovich that I tried, for ex
I don't know which C++ you're talking about, but the one that I use on
daily basis and work on has lists (std::list), dictionaries (std::map,
std::multimap, etc.), has many garbage collectors as libraries with
a popular one freely available from Hans Boehm's web site -- industrial
strengh. You do
I'm sorry to say but in my experience, I don't see Python, Ruby, C#
being higher level than C++. The thing that distinguishes Aldor
from C++ is dependent types. Apart from that, I don't see much difference
that would make me qualify Aldor as higher level than C++.
Notice that I'm specifically t
I find it frustrating to watch yet-another-CAS being born.
There are 30 years and hundreds of man-years invested in a
system the size of Axiom. No single person, and likely no single
group, is going to get the long-term, expensive support to do
this again from scratch. There are no funding visiona
> I agree witht the arguments that you presented. Especially with
> "There are very
> few programming languages that have invented anything new in the last
> decade or so". But now comes the point, which seems natural to me, but
> where we disagree - why don't we then just use a language which is
| Not only do we want the program to be correct but we also
| want it to accurately reflect or represent the formal structure
| of the matematical objects that we are manipulating.
Note that it is possible to write correct programs without explicit
type annotation. The issue relates to scale, di
But the point of this exercise for me is still to present Spad
for Python programmers - not really an argument for or against
one or the other. Presenting it this way as a challenge seems
like a way of motivating more interest in this subject. I think this
is important for some of the same reasons
ot be
easily rewritten in Python, but I still didn't have time to get
through it. But as you know Python - what exactly can be done in Aldor
that cannot be done in Python?
Ondrej
On 3/29/07, Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On March 28, 2007 7:42 AM Ondrej Certik wrote:
> ...
>
x27;s return a Polynomial class instead.
This would make sense to me, and we could do it in SymPy as well.
Ondrej
On 28 Mar 2007 06:19:10 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Ondrej Certik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > The usual example is:
| &
The usual example is:
(1/2)*x^2 + (1/3)*x + 3
Type: Polynomial Fraction Integer
%::Fraction(Polynomial(Integer))
2
3x + 2x + 18
-
6
Type: Fraction Polynomial Integer
When you read a maths book most
Unfortunately, I haven't found a .pdf file of Gruntz thesis, but
http://sympy.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/gruntz.pdf
Ondrej
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
On 26 Mar 2007 14:08:26 +0200, Martin Rubey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For someone who knows Axiom well, it should take like a week of a work. In
> > SymPy I was doing it I think like 3 weeks, because I had to implement many
> > other things and I was spending most of the time in the series
But matrices are different kind of objects. I was talking about just
noncommutative symbols, for example the Pauli algebra:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_matrices
If you want to look at the actual implementation:
http://sympy.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/sympy/modules/paulialgebra.py
the r
On 3/26/07, Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 03/26/2007 02:36 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
>> Hmmm, I would have thought that commutativity is a property of the
>> multiplication of the domain you are working in and not a property of a
>> symbol.
>
> I kn
Aha. Do you have lots of testcases like that one in SymPy?
I tested all the limits in Demidovich, you can find SymPy testcases here:
http://sympy.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/tests/test_demidovich.py
(it should be easy to understand it, if not, just ask me)
And some more testcases (from Gruntz) a
Hmmm, I would have thought that commutativity is a property of the
multiplication of the domain you are working in and not a property of a
symbol.
I know - originaly I had a special class NCMul, for noncommutative
multiplication. But first it duplicates some code and second - some
symbols are co
Ah, but that means formal power series with symbolic coefficients? Or
does one need Laurant or even Puiseux series?
Depending on the limit, sometimes you need to know how to make a
series of an expression like
log(1+1/x)
around x=0+
You can try it in Maple, the trick is to treat any possible
52 matches
Mail list logo
