On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 6:27:28 PM UTC-5, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Franco Saliola
> wrote:
> >
> > Here is a mini report on Sage Day 65. I'm not an organizer so this is
> not
> > official.
> > Thanks to Anne Schilling for helping to prepare this.
> >
> If you are asking for ideas, I'm wondering: how hard would it be to
> give the user better information and better options in the case when a
> Sage install fails due to a package?
>
I'll add a +1 for this idea.
I helped Stephen Doty install the development version of Sage on his
machine whi
On Friday, June 12, 2015, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Actually, Peter Tingley's Sage was not working due to some git problems
> (committing on top of the develop branch)! That has been fixed. So it was
> not really an install problem.
>
> The SageMathCloud was great for those who had trouble installi
Actually, Peter Tingley's Sage was not working due to some git problems
(committing on top of the develop branch)! That has been fixed. So it was not
really an install problem.
The SageMathCloud was great for those who had trouble installing Sage on their
own computer. Sometimes we had connecti
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 1:26 AM, William Stein wrote:
> This is a bummer. It gives me even more motivation to make
> SageMathCloud Sage-developer friendly.I'm also curious if anybody
> has any -- possibly *radical* -- suggestions about how to address this
> problem using new ideas.
+1 for a
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Franco Saliola wrote:
>
> Here is a mini report on Sage Day 65. I'm not an organizer so this is not
> official.
> Thanks to Anne Schilling for helping to prepare this.
>
> - 24 tickets on trac are tagged with `sagedays65` or `sd65`. Some of these
> have
> been po
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:59:10PM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
> How does sage know to supply them with a tensor method?
See ModulesWithBasis.ParentMethods.tensor and
ModulesWithBasis.ElementMethods.tensor. Those could be lifted to
Modules if we had more general implementations.
Cheers,
Here is a mini report on Sage Day 65. I'm not an organizer so this is not
official.
Thanks to Anne Schilling for helping to prepare this.
- 24 tickets on trac are tagged with `sagedays65` or `sd65`. Some of these
have
been positively reviewed and marked as fixed. Some are waiting for review
(h
How does sage know to supply them with a tensor method?
--Mark
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 08:46:34AM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
> > One last question: how do morphisms of modules know they can be tensored?
>
> Like parents or elements: because they (should) have a "tensor"
> method?
>
> (I may
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 08:46:34AM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
> One last question: how do morphisms of modules know they can be tensored?
Like parents or elements: because they (should) have a "tensor"
method?
(I may have misunderstood your question ...)
Cheers,
You're right.
One last question: how do morphisms of modules know they can be tensored?
--Mark
> How each functorial construction deduces from C, the properties of the
> composite object is an independent logic, isn't it?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 08:28:15AM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
> To do this entirely correctly each functorial construction needs to know what
> properties it
> respects; otherwise the new composite object may possess properties that
> don't make sense,
> even when all its pieces have the proper
Nicolas,
> - Where to put such a method (and what its name should be). As a
> starter, let's take sage.categories.category.meet_category_of.
>
> - How to implement it; I guess we can start by doing the usual meet,
> and then hardcoding the special rule for modules; maybe later we
> will hav
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 07:27:51AM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
> I'm implementing smash products of AlgebrasWithBasis,
> which are tensor products of algebras with not-necessarily-componentwise
> product. When the tensor factors are themselves tensor products,
> I don't want to use the default te
Nicolas,
I'm implementing smash products of AlgebrasWithBasis,
which are tensor products of algebras with not-necessarily-componentwise
product. When the tensor factors are themselves tensor products,
I don't want to use the default tensor product construction, which flattens
tensors (good for li
Hi Mark!
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 06:44:04PM -0400, Mark Shimozono wrote:
> I require a method which, given a sage category of a module,
> returns the ring which acts upon it.
>
> There is a method :meth:`ModulesWithBasis.base_ring`
> which is supposed to give the base ring of a module (rat
16 matches
Mail list logo
