I have the honor of owning a CoreDuo MacMini, and iBook G4, and a
Core2Duo
MacBook Pro. All of these machines are in good health and produce very
adequate
performance. That said, to keep Sage current on all three machines I
need
OS10.4 32bit PowerPC G4, OS10.6 32bit CoreDuo, and OS10.6 64bit
Core2D
Hi David,
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> As a short temp hack, I've set up a cron job to clear out /tmp/ECL* every
> two hours (midnight, 2am, 4am etc). This can't guarantee a build, but I
> think it is the only short term option.
Thank you for this. I have resumed
Hi
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 09:55:02AM -0700, Rob Beezer wrote:
> Sounds like Dan Drake has a simple test working on a clean 10.04
> install (thanks, Dan!), so that is good news, I believe. If you want
> to test your setup, in the notebook, try something simple like just
>
> var('x y')
> plot3d(x
Minh Nguyen schrieb:
Hi folks,
As reported on sage-devel [1], Sage 4.4.2.alpha0 mostly has the
following doctest failures:
* 32- vs. 64-bit issue in matrix/matrix1.pyx --- this is tracked at
ticket #8944 [2] and a patch is awaiting review.
* doctest failures in misc/sagedoc.py --- this can be
On 11 May 2010 05:14, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Is anyone interested, or has some time to spare, to review various
> tickets for the upcoming rc release of Sage 4.4.2 or the final
> release? The following are necessary for any upcoming release of Sage
> 4.4.2, whether it be an rc or final
While preparing a linear algebra class with sage, i found that the
functions related to eigenvectors, eigenspaces and eigenvalues are not
function of the endomorphism objects (which would be the
mathematically correct deffinition), but of the matrix objects.
Wouldn't it make sense to add these fun
On Tuesday, May 11, 2010, mmarco wrote:
> While preparing a linear algebra class with sage, i found that the
> functions related to eigenvectors, eigenspaces and eigenvalues are not
> function of the endomorphism objects (which would be the
> mathematically correct deffinition), but of the matrix
On 05/11/2010 01:45 AM, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Jason Grout
mailto:jason-s...@creativetrax.com>> wrote:
On 05/10/2010 01:27 PM, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
Hi,
The latest sagenb package is included in Sage 4.4.1
(sagenb-0.8.p0.spkg). The
On May 11, 11:22 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 05/11/2010 01:45 AM, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Jason Grout
> > mailto:jason-s...@creativetrax.com>> wrote:
>
> > On 05/10/2010 01:27 PM, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
>
> > Hi,
>
> > The lates
On May 11, 2010, at 10:56 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> On May 11, 11:22 am, Jason Grout wrote:
>> On 05/11/2010 01:45 AM, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Jason Grout
>>> mailto:jason-s...@creativetrax.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/10/2010 01:2
On May 11, 1:53 pm, Roman Pearce wrote:
> For what it's worth, PowerPC is totally obsolete and there were not
> that many 32-bit only Intel Macs shipped before they switched to the
> Core2. I think you would do fine supporting only 64-bit x86 on 10.5
> and 10.6. That should cover everything bac
> There is a pynac hg repo in the pynac spkg.
Which is not unpacked by default in a source distribution, and which
(presumably) would require someone to make an spkg and sage -f it each
time, though I may just be ignorant of an easier way to do that. But
sage -b wouldn't do it, correct?
>
> Any
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> On May 11, 1:53 pm, Roman Pearce wrote:
>> For what it's worth, PowerPC is totally obsolete and there were not
>> that many 32-bit only Intel Macs shipped before they switched to the
>> Core2. I think you would do fine supporting only 6
> > 2.) Having done this (or even not), shall we deliver the Mac OS X
> > binary distributions in one and the same directory, i.e. discard the
> > distinction (see E above) between "intel" and "powerpc" binary
> > directories? (This would imply that we should add some mechanism(s) in
> > the Sage
This might be opening a can of worms, but...
Currently the callable symbolic ring (i.e., what we get when we do
something like f(x)=x^2) blissfully ignores the infrastructure in Sage
for defining maps. Instead, (to the best of my knowledge) callable
symbolic elements are just simple sugar ove
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> f(x)=x^2 (SR --> SR)
>
> f(x,y,z)=x*y (SR^3 --> SR)
>
> f(x,y,z)=[x*y,y+z] (SR^3 --> SR^2)
>
> using the category framework?
What would you want to do once you have those maps?
--Mike
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@
Hello, all!
After running
random_matrix(GF(2), 2, 1)
I always get the same matrix, [[1][1]].
Also, the following code
freq = {}
for _ in range(1000):
M = random_matrix(GF(2), 2, 2)
M.set_immutable()
if M not in freq:
freq[M] = 1
else:
freq[M] += 1
show(freq)
gi
2010/5/11 Jan Groenewald :
> Hi
Hi,
> On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 09:55:02AM -0700, Rob Beezer wrote:
>> Sounds like Dan Drake has a simple test working on a clean 10.04
>> install (thanks, Dan!), so that is good news, I believe. If you want
>> to test your setup, in the notebook, try something si
On 05/11/10 07:56 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
mailto:david.kir...@onetel.net>> wrote:
Has the version of ECL been updated recently?
I insist that this is not a regression, it is just a misinterpretation
on our side of how mkstemp() s
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> On 05/11/10 07:56 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
>> mailto:david.kir...@onetel.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Has the version of ECL been updated recently?
>>
>>
>> I insist that this is n
On 05/11/2010 03:20 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
f(x)=x^2 (SR --> SR)
f(x,y,z)=x*y (SR^3 --> SR)
f(x,y,z)=[x*y,y+z] (SR^3 --> SR^2)
using the category framework?
What would you want to do once you have those maps?
Good question. First
Hi folks,
I have wrapped up a t2.math binary of Sage 4.4.2.alpha0. You can find it at
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-4.4.2.alpha0/sage-4.4.2.alpha0-t2.math.tar.gz
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscrib
As a note,
MatrixSpace(GF(2), nrows, ncols).random_element()
works as expected.
Regards,
Roberto.
On May 11, 5:39 pm, Roberto Nóbrega wrote:
> Hello, all!
>
> After running
>
> random_matrix(GF(2), 2, 1)
>
> I always get the same matrix, [[1][1]].
>
> Also, the following code
>
> freq = {}
>
Dear mailing list,
I was wondering if there is any interest in a Sage package to compute
with differential forms. Right now, I have the rudiments of a
differential form class with the obvious operations (wedge product,
exterior differential, Hodge star, ...) but I want to take this
somewhat furth
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 4:18 PM, jvkersch wrote:
> Dear mailing list,
>
> I was wondering if there is any interest in a Sage package to compute
> with differential forms. Right now, I have the rudiments of a
> differential form class with the obvious operations (wedge product,
> exterior differen
On 05/11/2010 04:18 PM, jvkersch wrote:
Dear mailing list,
I was wondering if there is any interest in a Sage package to compute
with differential forms. Right now, I have the rudiments of a
differential form class with the obvious operations (wedge product,
exterior differential, Hodge star, .
Is anyone interested in learning how to do an MPIR release? No
experience required!
I've just committed some changes to MPIR to fix the extended GCD
normalisation in MPIR for Sage and Pari and this is enough for a mini
MPIR 2.0.1 release.
I can teach you how to do it, step-by-step from tuning, to
Hi Bill,
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Bill Hart wrote:
> Is anyone interested in learning how to do an MPIR release?
Yes, I'm *very* interested in learning how to manage an MPIR release.
> I can teach you how to do it, step-by-step from tuning, to making a
> tarball, through testing to pap
Excellent! Thanks Minh.
Below if a VERY rough first draft of the procedure. I'll fill each
step in with more detail as the release proceeds. Probably best to
coordinate this via email and perhaps we'll make an html page on the
MPIR website detailing all the steps so that anyone can do this by
foll
Hi Bill,
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Bill Hart wrote:
> Excellent! Thanks Minh.
>
> Below if a VERY rough first draft of the procedure. I'll fill each
> step in with more detail as the release proceeds.
Thank you for detailing the release procedure.
> Probably best to
> coordinate this v
Hello Everybody
I was working on a function is_perfect, which tests whether a given graph is
perfect. This function has the bad idea to compute the complement of a
graph.
Writing the docstrings, I wrote that Bipartite Graphs are obviously perfect,
which is perfectly true.
Here is what happens in
Some years ago I started writing a z-transform routine for Maxima,
based on the following work for REDUCE:
http://www.zib.de/Symbolik/reduce/moredocs/ztrans.pdf
I'd be happy to rewrite it for Sage, except that I don't know how to
implement rule-based programs. Can anybody provide me with a point
Maybe the problem is that somewhere in the depths of is_perfect, a
BipartiteGraph is being created without the intention to use it that
way. Perhaps it is in self.complement(), or some other function that
is implicitly assuming to use the current class to make a copy, when
it should be making a cop
> Maybe the problem is that somewhere in the depths of is_perfect, a
> BipartiteGraph is being created without the intention to use it that
> way. Perhaps it is in self.complement(), or some other function that
> is implicitly assuming to use the current class to make a copy, when
> it should be ma
> Nonon, it is just that if you now type g.complement() on a Bipartite
> Graph in Sage, you will raise an exception ! My function fails only
> when I call it on a bipartite Graph !
I guess my point is that a graph should be a BipartiteGraph when it
makes sense. It certainly seems right to me to ha
jvkersch writes:
> Last but not least, I noticed that there was some discussion on this
> mailing list on adding support for differential forms and exterior
> algebra using FriCAS and/or Reduce.
In case you are interested in using FriCAS to extend Sage, I'd be glad
to actively work on that (an
36 matches
Mail list logo
