On Apr 15, 2008, at 04:18 , mabshoff wrote:
>
> Hello folks
>
> here we go with 3.0.alpha5. So, that happened to 3.0.alpha4? It was
> never announced in public since it was a snapshot I initially
> considered
> potentially unstable, but that didn't happen. We have closed a total
> of *221* ticket
I'm going to a conference for the rest of this week, so I haven't had a
chance yet to test Sage 3.0.alpha?. It seems though that it will fix this
problem.
I actually discovered this naughty example by comparing the results against
nauty in some code that I was running. The graphs that I gave are
At first I liked -nb more than -n for just launching the notebook, but
I often want to rebuild and launch the notebook when testing 3d stuff,
so I guess I'll give -n and -bn +1.
-M. Hampton
On Apr 15, 6:01 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Apr 15, 2008, at 2:06 PM, William Stei
Ryan Hinton wrote:
>
Ryan, folks,
> I know Sage 3.0 is coming up soon. Please consider this a friendly
> reminder that someone (me) is excited to have Sage run on FreeBSD!
>
> Thanks!
The quickest way to get this port going again is to provide me with a
VMWare image (preferably 64 bit) and
On Apr 15, 2008, at 2:06 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:03 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
>>> would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
>>> David
>>
>> I would make good use of that feature.
>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:02 AM, parisse
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>
> > Which libraries does it check for that a standard system won't have?
> > I guess I'll find out.
> >
> > On OS X my build fails with:
> > In file included from gen.h:39,
> > from sym2poly.h:
All tests passed on my intel mac pro (running 10.4.11).
-M. Hampton
On Apr 15, 4:04 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My alpha5 build report:
>
> (1) arch linux failure when building lapack; this is a known issue involving
> fortran. I'll try working around it... yep that gets pas
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Jason Grout
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> David Roe wrote:
> > I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
> > would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
> > David
> >
>
> +1, if only to keep with the very deeply ingrained unix co
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 2:03 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
> > would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
> > David
>
> I would make good use of that feature.
>
> +1 to -n starting the notebook, -nb building first
David Roe wrote:
> I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
> would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
> David
>
+1, if only to keep with the very deeply ingrained unix convention of
each letter in a "-" short option meaning something separate (so if I
see "b",
My alpha5 build report:
(1) arch linux failure when building lapack; this is a known issue involving
fortran. I'll try working around it... yep that gets past the lapack issue.
(2) 32-bit ubuntu, debian, 64-bit debian; sage.math: 100% good
(3) OS X 10.5 ppc:
sage -t devel/sage/sage/mod
> I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
> would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
> David
I would make good use of that feature.
+1 to -n starting the notebook, -nb building first.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group
Just to verify, the ticket
> #2765: Robert Miller: bug in graph_isom, Hoffman-Singleton
>constructor
was a fix to a bug which Chris Godsil reported to me a week ago (which
I was able to fix in one day!). In particular, two permutations of the
Hoffman-Singleton graph were giving different
On Apr 15, 2008, at 1:40 PM, David Roe wrote:
>
> I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
> would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
+1 for this. I'm quite used to using both 'br' and 'b'. I do note,
however, that "-br" is very different from "-rb" :-}
Just
didier deshommes wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Currently the command-line option to start sage directly in (secure)
>> notebook mode is -notebook. What do people think of adding a shorter
>> alternative, such as sage -n? If people are wary
I would prefer sage -n, because -b suggests build to me, so sage -nb
would be rebuild and then start the notebook.
David
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:29 PM, didier deshommes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Currently
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Currently the command-line option to start sage directly in (secure)
> notebook mode is -notebook. What do people think of adding a shorter
> alternative, such as sage -n? If people are wary about assigning
> single-
If people are like me an don't like to wait a couple of hours
compiling the latest alpha:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/yqiang/sage-3.0.alpha5-i386-Darwin.dmg
Cheers,
Yi
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
Jaap Spies wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
>> Hello folks
>>
>> here we go with 3.0.alpha5. So, that happened to 3.0.alpha4? It was
>> never announced in public since it was a snapshot I initially
>> considered
>> potentially unstable, but that didn't happen. We have closed a total
>> of *221* tickets so
There is an old ticket #793 about implementing a zeta_function method
for hyperelliptic curves. Such a method would have to have a default
behavior in case none of the special-purpose methods we have already
implemented are appropriate.
So I thought I'd try writing a generic method for schemes ov
Not really, but the professor's page is at http://users.rowan.edu/~simons/
He has been touting your software pretty heavily to us, especially GAP
which is uber handy.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscr
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yep, that was exactly what I meant. Of course I know it is not an
> instantaneous process. :-P I was just curious if the wheels were
> turning, it would be great if I could just yum install sage and be
> ready to roll, esp
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Kiran Kedlaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Currently the command-line option to start sage directly in (secure)
> notebook mode is -notebook. What do people think of adding a shorter
> alternative, such as sage -n? If people are wary about assigning
> single
Yep, that was exactly what I meant. Of course I know it is not an
instantaneous process. :-P I was just curious if the wheels were
turning, it would be great if I could just yum install sage and be
ready to roll, especially since we have been using sage pretty
extensively in my advanced abstract
Currently the command-line option to start sage directly in (secure)
notebook mode is -notebook. What do people think of adding a shorter
alternative, such as sage -n? If people are wary about assigning
single-letter options, then sage -nb is another possibility.
Kiran
--~--~-~--~~--
mabshoff wrote:
> Hello folks
>
> here we go with 3.0.alpha5. So, that happened to 3.0.alpha4? It was
> never announced in public since it was a snapshot I initially
> considered
> potentially unstable, but that didn't happen. We have closed a total
> of *221* tickets so far. This alpha should bu
There is already a fedora project working on packaging sage into
fedora. Do you mean something like that? It just doesn't happen
instantaneous ;)
H
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group
Installed and passed sage -testall on an intel macbook running os 10.4.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 7:18 AM, mabshoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello folks
>
> here we go with 3.0.alpha5. So, that happened to 3.0.alpha4? It was
> never announced in public since it was a snapshot I initially
>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have the following problem:
>
> 1) current sympy spkg in Sage has a file:
>
> /sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sympy/core/parser.py
>
> that we removed in later versions of sympy, because it has the
All tests pass on 64-bit RHEL (Opteron), and no more segfaults at exit
either.
Kiran
mabshoff wrote:
> Hello folks
>
> here we go with 3.0.alpha5. So, that happened to 3.0.alpha4? It was
> never announced in public since it was a snapshot I initially
> considered
> potentially unstable, but that
Hi,
I have the following problem:
1) current sympy spkg in Sage has a file:
/sage/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sympy/core/parser.py
that we removed in later versions of sympy, because it has the same
name as the standard module.
2) later, we use the standard python parser module in sympy
I noticed that you guys aren't part of the Fedora package list. Have
you tried to get on that? I only ask because this is easily the most
useful math program available and you would probably get a way larger
user base if you were part of the major packaging lists like yum/rpm
or apt.
--~--~-
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Alex Ghitza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> There are some inconsistencies in linear algebra over fields like CDF.
> Some trouble was already reported in #2256. The following is another issue:
>
> sag
Hello,
I have not tried to compile SAGE v3.0 yet, nor am I familiar with Arch
or its method of distributing packages. However, I did create the RPM
distributable version of SAGE. Upon reviewing the PKGBUILD file
available on the link you provided, I thought we might be able to
share our knowledge
Nick Alexander wrote:
>> simplify(trivial=True)
>
> I hate options so much it's not even funny. Two ideas, two
> functions! Names express intent!
>
> Nick
I agree with the concept. However, in this case, I would say that it is
the *same* idea, but two levels of such (i.e., idea="simplify
Hello folks
here we go with 3.0.alpha5. So, that happened to 3.0.alpha4? It was
never announced in public since it was a snapshot I initially
considered
potentially unstable, but that didn't happen. We have closed a total
of *221* tickets so far. This alpha should build and doctest without
any si
Hi!
> Which libraries does it check for that a standard system won't have?
> I guess I'll find out.
>
> On OS X my build fails with:
> In file included from gen.h:39,
> from sym2poly.h:25,
> from sym2poly.cc:32:
> vecteur.h:25:28: error: gsl/gsl_vector.h: No such
37 matches
Mail list logo
