Hey Jason,
It's good to hear from you. Happy new year!
In fact, I was about to send you an e-mail for two things :-)
- Warn you about the rebase + little fixes in
triangular-morphisms-jb.patch and ask you about your time-line for
finalizing it.
- Ask whether you could review
I made these changes and also added Nicolas as an author. The
reposted patch is on the trac server.
Dan
If you (Dan and Nicolas) would like to submit the patch jointly,
I am happy to review. Here are a couple of small comments:
- Perhaps it would be better to name the file
Hi David,
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
It needs reviewing, and I'd appreciate if a few people could have a look at
it.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7818
I have started building Sage 4.3.1.alpha1 with the updated sage-env
hi,
sage 4.3 fails to build on this machine at the m4ri stage, previous
version that
I compiled was sage-3.2, which worked fine.
Linux xxx.xxx.net 2.6.9-67.0.15.ELsmp #1 SMP Wed May 7 04:33:01 CDT
2008 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
It's running Scientific Linux SL 4.8
Below is the last part of the
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 23:55:49 -0800, Robert Bradshaw
rober...@math.washington.edu wrote:
I think this should go in as (2), perhaps as an optional package to
start with, assuming the performance issues can be addressed (and it
looks like there's been progress made in that area) it would
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I get the following problem when trying to make a 64-bit build of Sage
on Open Solaris (Intel Xeon processor). I would add the build of ATLAS
failed, so I had to just skip that.
[...]
File
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I get the following problem when trying to make a 64-bit build of Sage
on Open Solaris (Intel Xeon processor). I would add the build of ATLAS
failed, so I had to just skip that.
[...]
The problem is probably a 32 vs 64 bit issue. See the
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David,
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
It needs reviewing, and I'd appreciate if a few people could have a look at
it.
Dear sage-devel,
In trying to get R to work as well as possible when it comes to
additional packages, I notice that one problem is that on some systems
certain libraries or headers (I'm not using those terms correctly,
probably) are available, and on others not. Here is a snippet of an
example
I define a rational function in two variables over a finite field:
{{{
sage: R.x,y = GF(2)[]
sage: f = x*y/(x+y)
sage: f.parent()
Fraction Field of Multivariate Polynomial Ring in x, y over Finite
Field of size 2
}}}
I try to factor it, and get this error:
{{{
sage: f.factor()
kcrisman wrote:
Dear sage-devel,
In trying to get R to work as well as possible when it comes to
additional packages, I notice that one problem is that on some systems
certain libraries or headers (I'm not using those terms correctly,
probably) are available, and on others not. Here is a
On Jan 7, 10:32 am, Jaap Spies j.sp...@hccnet.nl wrote:
kcrisman wrote:
Dear sage-devel,
In trying to get R to work as well as possible when it comes to
additional packages, I notice that one problem is that on some systems
certain libraries or headers (I'm not using those terms
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Robert Miller wrote:
It does look like descent_two_isogeny is what it is failing to
compile, but I really can't help without more information. Is there a
way to get gcc to print out why it's failing?
It occurs to me that this depends on ratpoints, which has some issues
Dear John,
I haven't written any of the code involved, so I am not absolutely
sure about this, but after looking at the code for a few minutes, I
think the following is the case:
The FractionFieldElement objects have a method factor, but this
takes no arguments other than self. This explains
Further to my earlier post, a search for def factor(self, in the
Sage library reveals that there are a lot of instances where the
factoring method supports various arguments. Thus, at the very least,
I think the fraction field implementation should allow further
arguments, too, and simply forward
William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David,
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
It needs reviewing, and I'd appreciate if a few people could have a look at
it.
2010/1/7 Sebastian Pancratz s...@pancratz.org:
Further to my earlier post, a search for def factor(self, in the
Sage library reveals that there are a lot of instances where the
factoring method supports various arguments. Thus, at the very least,
I think the fraction field implementation
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Jan 5, 2010, at 1:47 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Jason Grout wrote:
I'm trying to generate a list of functions where each function
returns its place in a list. Here is my code:
cc=[(lambda: x) for x in [1..2]]
However, I have:
cc[0]()
Jaap Spies wrote:
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I get the following problem when trying to make a 64-bit build of Sage
on Open Solaris (Intel Xeon processor). I would add the build of ATLAS
failed, so I had to just skip that.
[...]
The problem is probably a 32 vs 64 bit
Sebastian Pancratz wrote:
Further to my earlier post, a search for def factor(self, in the
Sage library reveals that there are a lot of instances where the
factoring method supports various arguments. Thus, at the very least,
I think the fraction field implementation should allow further
2010/1/7 Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com:
I haven't read this thread very carefully, but just from a python
perspective, you probably want something like the following to pass on all
of the arguments.
def factor(self, *args, **kwds)
return
In fact, this is not quite what I wanted. I should have written
def factor(self, *args, **kwds)
return self.numerator().factor(*args, **kwds) / \
self.denominator().factor(*args, **kwds)
In the meantime, while waiting for further comments, I've put this up
as ticket #7868. I'll
Jason, you beat me to it. Thank you for letting me know, though!
Sebastian
On Jan 7, 5:01 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
Sebastian Pancratz wrote:
Further to my earlier post, a search for def factor(self, in the
Sage library reveals that there are a lot of instances
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
William Stein wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi David,
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
It needs reviewing, and I'd appreciate if a few people could have a
look at
Hi,
Just curious if this is how we want interacts to look on Internet
Explorer - see http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kcrisman/IEinteract.png
I'm referring to the weird blue box at the end. This is IE7 on
Windows XP. It doesn't look that much like is is on other browsers,
but maybe that
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Could #7818 get a positive review, be dropped into alpha2, and let Jaap
Spies get on with the port to Open Solaris? I very much doubt most
people will notice any difference whatsoever, but it will make the
Solaris port a lot easier, and allow for some
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Could #7818 get a positive review, be dropped into alpha2, and let Jaap
Spies get on with the port to Open Solaris? I very much doubt most
people will notice any difference whatsoever, but it will make the
Solaris port a lot
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Could #7818 get a positive review, be dropped into alpha2, and let Jaap
Spies get on with the port to Open Solaris? I very much doubt most
people will notice any difference whatsoever, but it will make the
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
It's gone 2 AM here, and I'm not going to go into a deep debugging
session, but if anyone has any ideas about the error below, let me know.
Systems is a Sun Ultra 27, 3.333 GHz Xeon.
Open Solaris 06/2009
gcc 4.4.2, configured to use the Sun linker (not GNU 'ld')
My
On Jan 7, 8:37 am, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
The changes introduced are deliberately very small - which is why I think the
file is safe.
Unfortunately, given the file sage-env has no echo statements, it's hard to
know exactly what sage-env has done, compared to what
John H Palmieri wrote:
On Jan 7, 8:37 am, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
The changes introduced are deliberately very small - which is why I think the
file is safe.
Unfortunately, given the file sage-env has no echo statements, it's hard to
know exactly what sage-env has done,
I've yet to get Sage to build on Open Solaris (x86/x64), though I have tried on
a Sun Ultra 27 (Intel Xeon, not SPARC).
I don't know the best configuration of the build tools, but have something seem
as though they will allow progress to be made. In contrast Jaap seems to have
some problems
On Jan 7, 1:26 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
In the new version of sage-env, there are two if statements
involving $SAGE_PRINT_ENVIRONMENT. It makes a lot of sense not to
print these by default (for example, when starting Sage), but maybe
the second group of
Whe Sage builds, one usually sees something like this
zn_poly-0.9.p1/src/src/ks_support.c
Finished extraction
Host system
uname -a:
SunOS hawk 5.11 snv_111b i86pc i386 i86pc
If anyone wants access to a computer running HP-UX, let me know. The machine
won't be around 24 hours per day, 365 days per year due to the running costs.
But I expect it will be up for the next couple of weeks. If you have anything
you want to test, let me know.
About 8 or so people have
Hi David,
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
Can anyone tell me what invokes this command?
As of Sage 4.3.1.alpha1, Sage packages are installed using the script
SAGE_ROOT/local/bin/sage-spkg
That script has this block of code from line 297:
Minh Nguyen wrote:
Hi David,
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
david.kir...@onetel.net wrote:
SNIP
Can anyone tell me what invokes this command?
As of Sage 4.3.1.alpha1, Sage packages are installed using the script
SAGE_ROOT/local/bin/sage-spkg
That script has this block
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I've yet to get Sage to build on Open Solaris (x86/x64), though I have
tried on a Sun Ultra 27 (Intel Xeon, not SPARC).
I don't know the best configuration of the build tools, but have
something seem as though they will allow progress to be made. In
contrast Jaap seems
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I've yet to get Sage to build on Open Solaris (x86/x64), though I have
tried on a Sun Ultra 27 (Intel Xeon, not SPARC).
I don't know the best configuration of the build tools, but have
something seem as though they will allow progress to be made. In
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Can you check the md5 checksums?
kir...@boxen:~/Open_Solaris_Build_Tools$ openssl md5
binutils-2.20-and-gcc-4.3.4-GNU-assembler-Sun-linker.tar.7z
openssl-0.9.8l-binaries.tar.7z
MD5(binutils-2.20-and-gcc-4.3.4-GNU-assembler-Sun-linker.tar.7z)=
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I've yet to get Sage to build on Open Solaris (x86/x64), though I have
tried on a Sun Ultra 27 (Intel Xeon, not SPARC).
I don't know the best configuration of the build tools, but have
something seem as though they will allow
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Can you check the md5 checksums?
kir...@boxen:~/Open_Solaris_Build_Tools$ openssl md5
binutils-2.20-and-gcc-4.3.4-GNU-assembler-Sun-linker.tar.7z
openssl-0.9.8l-binaries.tar.7z
MD5(binutils-2.20-and-gcc-4.3.4-GNU-assembler-Sun-linker.tar.7z)=
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Jaap Spies wrote:
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
I've yet to get Sage to build on Open Solaris (x86/x64), though I have
tried on a Sun Ultra 27 (Intel Xeon, not SPARC).
I don't know the best configuration of the build tools, but have
something seem as
Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
Well, I can't understand this! It's crazy. I'd just decompressed it on
boxen without issue.
Log in there, copy it from my directory, and try it yourself! I'm going
to upload the '7za' binary from my sparc there too. I think I'll resist
the temptation to compress it
A final draft of this proposal is available at:
http://buzzard.ups.edu/private/nsf-ccli-summary.pdf
http://buzzard.ups.edu/private/nsf-ccli-proposal.pdf
Comments, corrections, typos, nits would all be welcome. You can post
them here, or send them to Rob Beezer bee...@ups.edu through Friday
I think if the interact looks like the pictures in
http://www.ams.org/featurecolumn/archive/svd.html it would be
snazzier.
Also haven't played much with Sage interact so not sure if it is
possible, but wouldn't having 4 sliders (one for each entry) be easier
if someone really tries to find the
yeah, come to think of it, it is probably that i changed some things
without doing clone first (in my defense clone eats up a lot of space
on small hdd).
here is the hg heads output. Not sure how it is supposed to look, but
probably having two heads is unusual?
r...@rado-tablet:~/sage/devel/sage$
Hi Jason Grout (and others),
we started something on IRC last night which I really wanted to finish,
since you mentioned that you might pick up work again on dense RDF/CDF
matrices at some point.
Since I'm working on this from the sparse end (but can't upload my
changes for some time)
On Jan 7, 2010, at 9:25 PM, Rado wrote:
yeah, come to think of it, it is probably that i changed some things
without doing clone first (in my defense clone eats up a lot of space
on small hdd).
Fortunately it eats up less now, as the build output, .c files, and (I
think) docs are hard
On Jan 7, 2010, at 9:56 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Hi Jason Grout (and others),
we started something on IRC last night which I really wanted to
finish, since you mentioned that you might pick up work again on
dense RDF/CDF matrices at some point.
Since I'm working on this from the
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Jan 7, 2010, at 9:56 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Hi Jason Grout (and others),
we started something on IRC last night which I really wanted to
finish, since you mentioned that you might pick up work again on dense
RDF/CDF matrices at some point.
Since I'm
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Jan 7, 2010, at 9:56 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Hi Jason Grout (and others),
we started something on IRC last night which I really wanted to
finish, since you mentioned that you might pick up work again on
dense RDF/CDF matrices at
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Hi Jason Grout (and others),
we started something on IRC last night which I really wanted to finish,
since you mentioned that you might pick up work again on dense RDF/CDF
matrices at some point.
It's likely that that point won't be very soon (i.e., before
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
On Jan 7, 2010, at 9:56 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
Since which solver is suitable is in some sense a property of the
matrix, there would be a set_algorithms method which would set the
default order of algorithms to try and their options. Also all the
same options
54 matches
Mail list logo
