On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 at 08:27PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
[snip]
> That situation was just very frustrating for me, not because I
> couldn't get Magma (I got it for free as a developer), but that so
> many other students and colleagues couldn't get it.
Exactly! The value of any of these pieces of
William Stein wrote:
> One problem I personally had wasn't the same sort of forced transition
> from CAS X to CAS Y like you had, but that the sole "CAS" I could use
> was Magma, since it was literally the only program out there capable
> of doing pretty much any of the interesting computational m
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Dan Drake wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 at 12:13PM -0500, Luiz Felipe Martins wrote:
>> Believe me, going to Sage has been (and will continue to be) a major
>> time investment. Faculty coming to Sage will weigh their disillusion
>> with other software against the i
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 at 12:13PM -0500, Luiz Felipe Martins wrote:
> Believe me, going to Sage has been (and will continue to be) a major
> time investment. Faculty coming to Sage will weigh their disillusion
> with other software against the investment needed to change. I
> actually pondered about i
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 8:53 AM, john_perry_usm wrote:
>
> One of the reasons I switched to Sage was that a handful of years ago
> the previous CAS I used (who shall remain nameless) introduced a
> worksheet interface that grossly slowed down the system. Rather than
> improve the efficiency, subs
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Simon King
wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
> I just found that "sage" on sage.math yields sage 3.2.2, not 3.2.3. Is
> there a reason?
Because the sage.math hardware was physically broken when I did the
upgrade on the temporary replacement for sage.math, so when we swapped
Hi. The software you mention may remain nameless, but it is pretty
obvious what it is. There was a serious screw up when they tried to
redo their whole interface in Java, as I was told by a representative.
There are two main reasons I switched to sage, besides frustration
with other software:
1)
One of the reasons I switched to Sage was that a handful of years ago
the previous CAS I used (who shall remain nameless) introduced a
worksheet interface that grossly slowed down the system. Rather than
improve the efficiency, subsequent releases made things worse by
adding an extremely slow synt
William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Martin Albrecht
> wrote:
>>> Sure. I think that what you want is still orthogonal to the TinyMCE
>>> effort, but having another edit widget in the tree "just" for
>>> highlighting ought to be well thought out and the burden of
>>> maintenance
Dear Michael,
On 10 Jan., 09:49, mabshoff wrote:
> Yes. Not knowing what you do exactly one sure way to fix the issue if
> you do a lot of IO to $DOT_SAGE it to do
>
> mkdir /tmp/simon-sage
> export DOT_SAGE=/tmp/simon-sage
Yes, in fact I do a lot of IO to $DOT_SAGE. Thanks for the hint.
Che
On Jan 10, 12:58 am, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2009, at 7:46 AM, Ronan Paixão wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Em Qui, 2009-01-08 às 14:41 -0800, mabshoff escreveu:
> >
>
> >> The gcc memory requirements are not consistent, i.e. gcc 3.4.x does
> >> compile the LinBox extension using about 350 MB
On Jan 9, 2009, at 8:25 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Martin Albrecht
> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure. I think that what you want is still orthogonal to the TinyMCE
>>> effort, but having another edit widget in the tree "just" for
>>> highlighting ought to be well thought out a
On Jan 9, 2009, at 7:46 AM, Ronan Paixão wrote:
>
> Em Qui, 2009-01-08 às 14:41 -0800, mabshoff escreveu:
>
>>
>> The gcc memory requirements are not consistent, i.e. gcc 3.4.x does
>> compile the LinBox extension using about 350 MB peak or so. For gcc
>> 4.x it seems that maybe 750 MB is peak c
On Jan 10, 12:22 am, Simon King wrote:
> Hi all!
Hi Simon,
> I just found that "sage" on sage.math yields sage 3.2.2, not 3.2.3. Is
> there a reason?
Yep, the global one hasn't been updated yet. You can use the one in
/disk/scratch/mabshoff-sage-releases/sage-3.2.3/
> Also I wonder why t
Hi all!
I just found that "sage" on sage.math yields sage 3.2.2, not 3.2.3. Is
there a reason?
Also I wonder why the process that I'm running only gets 2% of CPU.
Not many processes are running at the moment. Is the I/O still a
problem?
Cheers
Simon
--~--~-~--~~~-
15 matches
Mail list logo
