On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 at 10:00PM -0600, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Sometimes if the code is very recursive, I use a hand made debugging
printing using decorators --- I decorate each function I want to debug
and it prints a nice tree like graph, so it's easy to check things,
e.g:
SYMPY_DEBUG=True
On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:29:46AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 04:40:50PM +0200, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Nicolas M.
To ease the reviewing of the category code, and also to make it
On Jun 21, 2009, at 8:21 AM, William Stein wrote:
2009/6/21 gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com:
On 21 Jun., 15:54, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/21 Bjarke Hammersholt Roune bjarke.ro...@gmail.com:
I quote from
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/inclusion.html
which is
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Dan Drakedr...@kaist.edu wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 at 10:00PM -0600, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Sometimes if the code is very recursive, I use a hand made debugging
printing using decorators --- I decorate each function I want to debug
and it prints a nice tree
On Jun 21, 2009, at 12:54 PM, John Cremona wrote:
2009/6/21 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, gswgeorgswe...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Hi John,
On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
This should be of interest to anyone who has ever
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Tom Boothbytomas.boot...@gmail.com wrote:
Progress Report:
I've gotten a massive response from reviewers, thank you all very
much! I'm using Craig Citro's new automerge script, which has both
made it very easy, and very frustrating, to apply patches. Easy
On 22 Jun., 11:25, Franco Saliola sali...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Here is a quick description of what is below: Subclasses of Element
complain that no sorting algorithm is defined even when all the rich
comparison methods have been implemented. Bug?
In the code sample below, C is a class
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Robert
Bradshawrober...@math.washington.edu wrote:
On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:29:46AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 04:40:50PM +0200, William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at
That sounds quite sensible to me. Sometimes I make a patch before
opening a ticket, so the patch name does not have the ticket number on
it (e.g. #6386 opened yesterday). But it would not be a bad thing if
I had opened the ticket first (to indicate that I was working on it)
so that I would have
2009/6/23 Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu:
On Jun 21, 2009, at 12:54 PM, John Cremona wrote:
2009/6/21 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:38 PM, gswgeorgswe...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Hi John,
On 21 Jun., 17:47, John Cremona john.crem...@gmail.com
Hi,
The video for Sage Days 16 is all posted at http://wiki.sagemath.org/days16
William
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:36 AM, John Cremonajohn.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
That sounds quite sensible to me.
What is that? It sounds below like you're basically arguing for
what we currently do.
Regarding what we currently do, this is not something that is
convention emerging or
I neither knew about search_def nor edit(). Thanks, I'll point them out both!
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_pgp: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x8EF0DC99
_otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF
_www: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~malb
_jab:
2009/6/23 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:36 AM, John Cremonajohn.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
That sounds quite sensible to me.
What is that? It sounds below like you're basically arguing for
what we currently do.
I wasn't very clear, sorry. I thought that
Just so that others can follow this discussion: could you post a
link or cut and paste some of your arguments against GPL v3?
I see how the difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3 may affect a
project like Java, but how does it matter for a project like SAGE? It
really seems to be a big deal to
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM, John Cremonajohn.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
Then we need conventions for followup patches on tickets (reviewer's
patches and the like). And a convention for whether the reviewer's
patch replaces the original (something all too easy to happen by
mistake when
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Burcin Erocalbur...@erocal.org wrote:
I am wondering whether there is any policy/framework
for hooking-up a specialized integration code as a part
of integration algorithm in new symbolic?
There isn't any, yet. That should change this week though. :)
I
2009/6/23 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:12 PM, John Cremonajohn.crem...@gmail.com wrote:
Then we need conventions for followup patches on tickets (reviewer's
patches and the like). And a convention for whether the reviewer's
patch replaces the original (something
Hi,
I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
My proposals are:
(1) These generalized functions be included in a new module as
sage.functions.generalized
(2) Dirac delta:
(a) represented as: dirac_delta
On Sunday 21 June 2009, Martin Albrecht wrote:
Hi,
as mentioned earlier I am preparing a talk on how to get started with Sage
development for Tuesday here at SD16. A first rc for my set of slides is
at:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/malb/talks/sagedev.pdf
It still seems rather
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:29:53 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Burcin Erocalbur...@erocal.org
wrote:
I am wondering whether there is any policy/framework
for hooking-up a specialized integration code as a part
of integration
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
My proposals are:
(1) These generalized functions be included in a new module as
On Jun 23, 2009, at 11:59 AM, David Joyner wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
My proposals are:
(1)
Hi Golam,
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:53:17 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
I am seeking your opinion to finalize the conventions
for three generalized functions that I am implementing currently.
My proposals are:
(1) These generalized functions be included in a new
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Robert Millerrlmills...@gmail.com wrote:
print, think, print, think, print, think, fix
What is your debug printing system? I put print 1, print 2,relevant_data
print 3, etc., and if I stick more debugging between 2 and 3, I'll
put print 2.5, etc. What is
Thanks David, Tim, Burcin!
Correct me if I have missed your points. With your suggestions
here is the new conventions for Heaviside and unit step
(2) Heaviside:
(a) represented as: heaviside
(b) latex name : \theta
(c) heaviside(0): will return symbolic expression
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:39 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Robert Millerrlmills...@gmail.com wrote:
print, think, print, think, print, think, fix
What is your debug printing system? I put print 1, print
2,relevant_data
print 3, etc., and
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:02:05 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks David, Tim, Burcin!
Thank you for all the effort.
Correct me if I have missed your points. With your suggestions
here is the new conventions for Heaviside and unit step
(2) Heaviside:
(a)
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Golam Mortuza
Hossaingmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks David, Tim, Burcin!
Correct me if I have missed your points. With your suggestions
here is the new conventions for Heaviside and unit step
(2) Heaviside:
(a) represented as: heaviside
(b)
I have an old patch sitting around on trac that did this: #1795. If you
want to pick up from there, it fixes a lot of these problems.
David
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
Hi David,
On Jun 23, 12:49 am, David Roe r...@math.harvard.edu wrote:
The
+1 from me as well.
David
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:29 AM, Franco Saliola sali...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Robert
Bradshawrober...@math.washington.edu wrote:
On Jun 22, 2009, at 11:44 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:29:46AM -0700,
Many kudos for this!
Honestly, I don't actually know whether it means that much, but at
this point I think that it could be useful for us to follow
Mathematica in defining two different functions: Heaviside which is
undefined in 0 and that is defined as the function whose derivative is
the Dirac
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
When I tried to build Sage on my Blade 2000 with gcc 4.4.0 configured to
use the Sun linker, so it failed to build, when building ATLAS.
make[3]: Entering directory
`/export/home/drkirkby/sage/sage-4.0.2/spkg/build/atlas-3.8.3.p3/ATLAS-build/lib'
ld -shared
As a clarification of what I was talking about, see this:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ImpulsePair.html
Regards
Maurizio
On 23 Giu, 23:45, Maurizio maurizio.gran...@gmail.com wrote:
Many kudos for this!
Honestly, I don't actually know whether it means that much, but at
this point I think
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:45 PM, Maurizio wrote:
Many kudos for this!
Honestly, I don't actually know whether it means that much, but at
this point I think that it could be useful for us to follow
Mathematica in defining two different functions: Heaviside which is
undefined in 0 and that is
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:29:34AM +0200, Franco Saliola wrote:
I'm also in favor of _test_X to avoid cluttering up the tab
completion. Another option to increase visibility would be to have a
test object, e.g.
sage: foo.test.associativity()
True
+1. I think it merges the two
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:37 PM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Tom Boothbytomas.boot...@gmail.com wrote:
Progress Report:
I've gotten a massive response from reviewers, thank you all very
much! I'm using Craig Citro's new automerge script, which
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:16:46AM +0200, William Stein wrote:
Regarding what we currently do, this is not something that is
convention emerging or standardization attempt. It's something
that Michael Abshoff standardized on probably 8-10 months ago, and as
far as I know strongly required
According to the top level README.txt
--
NOT OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED, BUT NEARLY WORKS:
PROCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM
sparc Solaris 10 -- works fine (needs custom built gcc
toolchain)
x86_64 Solaris 10 --
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Dr. David
Kirkbydavid.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
According to the top level README.txt
--
NOT OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED, BUT NEARLY WORKS:
PROCESSOR OPERATING SYSTEM
sparc Solaris 10 --
From the top README.txt
---
NOT SUPPORTED:
* FreeBSD
* Arch Linux
* Gentoo Linux
* Microsoft Windows (via Visual Studio C++)
* Microsoft Windows (via Cygwin)
We like all of the above operating systems, but
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:42:46 -0300
Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:20 PM, kcrismankcris...@gmail.com wrote:
So the conclusion is that we will go with the Mathematica style
notation.
Does that also apply to Golam's earlier comment
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Maurizio wrote:
As a clarification of what I was talking about, see this:
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ImpulsePair.html
Regards
Maurizio
How are they supposed to be plotted? Along with other impulses,
it would be fine, but next to any normal function, the
I think we should really make some effort to improve our page on Wikipedia.
Comparing the Sage and Mathematica pages on Wikipedia shows the
Mathematica one is much nicer. Would it not be sensible to put some
effort into promoting Sage there? If it looks like the program is more
complete, one
Some of you may be aware of Vladimir Bondarenko, who is an 'interesting'
character who can be very childish at times, but has written some
interesting software which can find faults with computer algebra systems.
He took a quick look at http://demo.sagenb.org/ as he could potentially
hook up
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Dr. David
Kirkbydavid.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
exp(-x^i).integral(x,0,1) returns
Traceback (click to the left for traceback)
...
Is %i an integer?
Ouch! Any Sage comments?
This is just coming from Maxima:
(%i3) integrate(exp(-x^(%i)),x,0,1);
Is %i an
Mike Hansen wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Dr. David
Kirkbydavid.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
exp(-x^i).integral(x,0,1) returns
Traceback (click to the left for traceback)
...
Is %i an integer?
Ouch! Any Sage comments?
This is just coming from Maxima:
(%i3)
One way would be to have a vertical ray that doesn't change the scaling of
the rest of the graph (just goes to the top of the viewing window). Not
precisely accurate, but better than nothing.
David
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Tim Lahey tim.la...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 23, 2009, at 5:46
I just noticed that the following quiz problem I gave my students came
back nicer from Sage (i.e., maxima) and sympy than mathematica. Kudos
to you guys for having a better answer:
Mathematica 7.0 for Linux x86 (32-bit)
Copyright 1988-2008 Wolfram Research, Inc.
In[1]:=
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:29:34AM +0200, Franco Saliola wrote:
I'm also in favor of _test_X to avoid cluttering up the tab
completion. Another option to increase visibility would be to have a
test
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 at 02:15AM +0100, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I think we should really make some effort to improve our page on
Wikipedia.
I'm not sure if I can really help with this, but I agree that
cultivating our Wikipedia page is necessary these days. It's not
entirely unlike how political
Ok, I've switched to using /space, the RAM disk on geom, and things
are coming along *much* faster. I hope to have an alpha out in a few
hours. You can see a snippet of the output from sage -merge at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/boothby/releases/4.1/mergelog
I've suppressed the
Hi,
Video and slides for *all* the talks so far from Sage Days 16 are now
posted here:
http://wiki.sagemath.org/days16
William
--
William Stein
Associate Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to
I agree. We could do something like plotting all the deltas with a
stem plot and then superimposing the rest of the plot
Maurizio
On 24 Giu, 04:21, David Roe r...@math.harvard.edu wrote:
One way would be to have a vertical ray that doesn't change the scaling of
the rest of the graph (just
54 matches
Mail list logo
