Hi,
I've been working on making the printing of polynomials prettier and
more consistent between the univariate setting and the multivariate
one.
There is one ticket (with patch) on trac now at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6551
which focuses on the case of exact coefficients and f
Davide,
Thanks for responding!
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:07 AM, Davide Cervone wrote:
>
> It will not be as easy as you think to modify jsMath to use @font-face
> web fonts.
>
> First, IE uses EOT fonts, while everyone else uses TTF and OTF fonts
> (and DON'T handle EOT fonts). Also, EOT fonts
Great, I will try to do this tomorrow.
Thanks.
Bill.
2009/7/18 Dr. David Kirkby :
> Bill Hart wrote:
>
>> In retrospect, I think your patch is the right way to go, and I'd have
>> no issue with using a later gcc (4.3.1 or later) on T2. The most
>> important thing which needs to be done is to fi
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> There is a bit of a catch-22 with polybori and mpfr on 't2' which I
> believe makes a need for
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6438
>
> to be incorporated in 4.1.1, so it needs a reviewer, despite the fact I
> agree it is not the easiest patch to review.
There is a bit of a catch-22 with polybori and mpfr on 't2' which I
believe makes a need for
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6438
to be incorporated in 4.1.1, so it needs a reviewer, despite the fact I
agree it is not the easiest patch to review. It is complicated by the
facts that
Bill Hart wrote:
> In retrospect, I think your patch is the right way to go, and I'd have
> no issue with using a later gcc (4.3.1 or later) on T2. The most
> important thing which needs to be done is to fix the ATLAS issue, then
> someone can begin to test some of these patches you have been com
Bill Hart wrote:
> Ah, we are talking about the same thing I think.
>
> How silly to pollute the namespace with another macro with the same
> name, especially as MPFR and GMP/MPIR are sister projects. But I am
> guessing this is not an exported symbol but only used internally.
>
> That means all
Bill Hart wrote:
> 2009/7/17 Dr. David Kirkby :
>> The build speed problem is due to ATLAS. Here is the list of packages
>> currently built on t2 (it's building now). Look at the times between them
>> What you may notice is a huge time between lapack-20071123.p0 @ 2315 and
>> atlas-3.8.3.p5 @
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 06:46:31PM +0100, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
> That could be reduced dramatically if we could save the temporary files
> it builds, produce a set of tuning values for the sun4v architecture,
> then ATLAS would not need to be tuned every time. But despite trying,
> and askin
2009/7/17 Dr. David Kirkby :
> Bill Hart wrote:
>>
>> This sage ticket 6453 is too hard. It actually looks like a "bug" in MPIR
>> to me.
>
> Hi,
>
> I copied this to sage-devel too.
>
>> The only way to test David Kirkby's fix on T2 it is to do sage -sh and
>> then run the spkg-install, etc.
>
>>
Bill Hart wrote:
> This sage ticket 6453 is too hard. It actually looks like a "bug" in MPIR to
> me.
Hi,
I copied this to sage-devel too.
> The only way to test David Kirkby's fix on T2 it is to do sage -sh and
> then run the spkg-install, etc.
> That means I'd need my own version of sage bu
On 07/16/09 06:57, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> Prabhu, did you make any progress on fixing VTK to build? I think the
> framework is only useful for a GUI, but we use notebook for the gui
> and there it just needs to build. Considering the amount of work and
> testing to convert all Sage to use framewor
Some updates on the sage notebook security review project I'm working
on:
First threat model for the development process:
The model I created might apply to other open source applications or
systems, or even not purely open source ones, as it is focused on the
development process, code changes /
I'm probably in the minority on this, but I think tachyon being
totally broken in sage-4.1 is bad enough that a sage-4.1.0.1 should be
released as soon as possible with this fixed, not waiting for the
4.1.1 cycle to finish in two weeks.
At the very least, perhaps sagenb can be patched.
-Marshall
Hello everybody !!!
I finally wrote the two versions of the LP solver for SAGE, the first
using COIN-OR and the second GLPK. It is a very early version of the
solver, with few if any control of errors ( feasibility, etc ... ) but
it still can be very useful !
My last problem is the following :
T
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 9:13 AM, David Joyner wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Martin
> Albrecht wrote:
>>
>> On Thursday 16 July 2009, David Joyner wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Kiran Kedlaya wrote:
>>> > One pet complaint that you might bring up with the Singular team: I
>
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Martin
Albrecht wrote:
>
> On Thursday 16 July 2009, David Joyner wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Kiran Kedlaya wrote:
>> > One pet complaint that you might bring up with the Singular team: I
>>
>> Speaking of pet complaints, can you ask if they will at
It will not be as easy as you think to modify jsMath to use @font-face
web fonts.
First, IE uses EOT fonts, while everyone else uses TTF and OTF fonts
(and DON'T handle EOT fonts). Also, EOT fonts are keyed to a
particular server, so they would have to be modified every time you
want to serve th
> In that case, the Developers' Guide needs to be adjusted accordingly.
> In particular, this section
>
> http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/coding_in_python.html#creating-a-new-
>directory
This is now http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6547
Cheers,
Martin
--
name: Martin Albrecht
_p
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Concerning ticket #6399
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6399
>
> does anyone know who reviewed that ticket?
>
I'm puzzled by this one too.
It looks to me that the fix has already been been incorporated in 4.1,
though I have no idea who review
Yes, sage 4.1.
Thanks for the patch! Now it works well
On Jul 17, 5:09 am, Marshall Hampton wrote:
> Are you using sage 4.1? Unfortunately the tachyon interface got
> broken in that release, but there is a patch at
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6542
>
> which will fix this in 4.
Hi folks,
Concerning ticket #6399
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6399
does anyone know who reviewed that ticket?
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from th
22 matches
Mail list logo
