[sage-devel] Re: spkg vote: SageTeX

On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 at 06:13PM -0800, mabshoff wrote: > If you check out http://wiki.sagemath.org/SPKG_Audit there is a loop > hole, i.e. exceptions are allowed in certain circumstances. So far we > have allowed this if Sage is in effect upstream for a component, i.e. > eclib comes to mind. Okay,

[sage-devel] Example C Library spkg

Hi sage-devel, I just patchbomb-ed a new spkg to trac (ticket #4857). From its README.txt: ... The intention of this spkg is to lower the hurdle for developers to enter the "Sage world". If you are among the ones who "learn by reading other people's code", and/or ever wanted to plug some C libra

[sage-devel] Re: Example C Library spkg

On Dec 23, 2:07 am, "Georg S. Weber" wrote: > Hi sage-devel, Hi Georg, > It's way from being perfect, so any comments are welcome! > -1 on the that example, it is way too complicated and introduces many constructs that we don't have and IMHO plainly don't need. In detail: * At the very

[sage-devel] Re: number field as polynomial quotient ring

Thanks to everyone who participated in this thread. It helped me figure out what others think about the issue, and also exactly what behaviour I want to see. I think we're all in agreement that in the situation we had above (K a number field, R the isomorphic polynomial quotient ring, r an elemen

[sage-devel] Re: Example C Library spkg

Despite the concrete criticism of Michael I want to point out that I very much like the spirit of what you're doing here! Cheers, Martin -- name: Martin Albrecht _pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8EF0DC99 _www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb _jab: martinralbre

[sage-devel] Re: Example C Library spkg

On Dec 23, 4:07 am, Martin Albrecht wrote: Hi, > Despite the concrete criticism of Michael I want to point out that I very much > like the spirit of what you're doing here! Yes, Georg is trying to solve a problem complex that needs to be solved, I just think he is going about it the wrong way.

[sage-devel] Re: sage.math

On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 8:08 AM, David Harvey <> wrote: > Has the host key for sage.math changed? Yes. We had to change it when switching to the new hardware, since Ubuntu's ssh refused to use my Debian ssh keys, claiming they were compromised. I had replaced the keys earlier because those were

[sage-devel] Re: sage.math

And, for the record, the new fingerprint should be 5e:53:c7:1f:81:fe:48:12:f2:38:2b:5d:52:4c:c1:51 - Robert On Dec 23, 2008, at 10:30 AM, William Stein wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 8:08 AM, David Harvey <> wrote: >> Has the host key for sage.math changed? > > Yes. We had to change it wh

[sage-devel] Re: Finite automata over graphs: edges question

Zdrazvitie Pavel, > Long-term goal is to work towards a general and consistent library of > formal language constructs, such as automata, grammars and so forth. > Recent merge of Words seems to be of support. We are thinking of many new functionalities to add in the Words library. Some of them a

[sage-devel] Re: Finite automata over graphs: edges question

Privet Sébastien, Thanks for reply, > We are thinking of many new functionalities to add in the Words > library. Some of them are related to automata and languages. For > example, I was thinking to add a class for Language. For example, one > could create a finite language from Words like : > >

[sage-devel] Re: Finite automata over graphs: edges question

On Dec 23, 12:31 pm, Pavel Sutyrin wrote: > BTW, there is a question of basics: how to represent unknown/ > uncomputable. Say, you are going to intersect two unrestricted context- > free languages (each having a pushdown automaton or a grammar inside). > As far as this is generally unsolvable, yo

[sage-devel] Re: Example C Library spkg

Wow, now that just had been updated considerably during the last days (I was unsuccessfully chasing a moving target there), it seems we can at least double again the information about how to create a spkg (and about how *certainly not* to do it). Michael, I

[sage-devel] Re: Finite automata over graphs: edges question

Carl, Thanks for reply, > Actually, it's quite easy to intersect two context-free languages A > and B: the answer is "the intersection of A and B", and I think it > would be great if Sage would allow you to form such an intersection > (if you're going to have lots of different kinds of languages

[sage-devel] Re: Finite automata over graphs: edges question

Carl, Thanks for reply, > Actually, it's quite easy to intersect two context-free languages A > and B: the answer is "the intersection of A and B", and I think it > would be great if Sage would allow you to form such an intersection > (if you're going to have lots of different kinds of languages

[sage-devel] Re: Example C Library spkg

On Dec 23, 1:31 pm, "Georg S. Weber" wrote: Hi Georg, > Wow, > > now that just had been updated > considerably during the last days (I was unsuccessfully chasing a > moving target there), it seems we can at least double again the > information about how t

[sage-devel] ModularSymbols_clear_cache() FUBAR?

Hi, I have been chasing a leak in modular symbols for well over a year and a half. Since then we had the test case below that clearly illustrates the problem: mabsh...@sage:/scratch/release-cycle/sage-3.2.3.alpha0$ ./sage -- | S

[sage-devel] hermes optional spkg

Hi, I propose removing the hermes optional spkg from the optional repo, and putting it in experimental. Does anybody care about or use that spkg? I have no real idea where it came from, who made it, etc., or even what it does! See http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4866 If nobody re

[sage-devel] Re: integrating existing python script into sage

Hi Thanks a lot for your prompt reply. But I wasn't able to install qasm spkg. I tried the following (1) attempted to install dvipng package, i couldn't install it as well. (2) attempted to install after sage -sh but both failed. Please find below the install-log report qasm-1.4 Machine: Linux

[sage-devel] polymake

Hi, I propose moving the polymake spkg to be experimental instead of optional. If anybody cares, please respond to this email. It's crystal clear having looked at the polymake spkg tonight that not a single person has successfully installed polymake in several months. See: http://trac.sagemat

[sage-devel] Re: integrating existing python script into sage

On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:04 PM, vivek wrote: > > Hi > > Thanks a lot for your prompt reply. > > But I wasn't able to install qasm spkg. > I tried the following > (1) attempted to install dvipng package, i couldn't install it as > well. Do not install that dvipng spkg. You *MUST* install dvipn

[sage-devel] Re: polymake

On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:02 PM, William Stein wrote: > Hi, > > I propose moving the polymake spkg to be experimental instead of > optional. If anybody cares, please respond to this email. It's > crystal clear having looked at the polymake spkg tonight that not a > single person has successful