On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Jay wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Yes, bpython is quite wonderful :).
>
> If I try to `easy_install bpython` from within a sage subshell I get
>
> ... (Full traceback if you'd like)
> ImportError: /opt/sage/local/lib/python2.6/lib-dynload/operator.so:
> undefined symbol: _PyUni
On Aug 17, 2:18 pm, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
> New packages are up at #7344 and #7345
> (http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7344andhttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7345)
> for review that should
> hopefully work for all platforms.
Question - are these under review as optional or
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
> On 08/17/10 09:26 AM, John Cremona wrote:
>>
>> At last, a contributiuon to this thread which actually addresses my
>> original question!
>>
In contrast, it seems sympow is not used by many people. The fact there
are
no bug
On 08/17/10 09:26 AM, John Cremona wrote:
At last, a contributiuon to this thread which actually addresses my
original question!
In contrast, it seems sympow is not used by many people. The fact there are
no bug reports of it not working on the public servers shows how little it
is used. (If so
Hello,
I just posted a short comment on William's blog, but thought I should
send it to the list for those who may have all ready viewed his blog
post:
"The official "overflow" site for SciPy is http://ask.scipy.org/en/,
which is built on top of Solace (http://opensource.plurk.com/solace/).
Robe
On 08/17/10 03:31 AM, Bill Hart wrote:
I have no sympathy for anyone who wants to include that code in Sage.
I have very little myself.
I know John Cremona has made the point SYMPOW is much faster than anything he
has written at computing the modular degree of an elliptic curve, but I'd
pers
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Harald Schilly
wrote:
> On Feb 23, 4:36 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
>> Has anyone thought of setting up a stack overflow-type site for Sage
>> support questions?
>
> . mathoverflow is good, but i think nearly nobody from here is over
> there?
I wrote a blog post abou
PLEASE ADVERTISE WHERE APPROPRIATE
Sage Day 25.5
First Announcement (en français plus bas)
LaCIM, UQAM, Montréal, Canada, September 1st, 2010
OVERVIEW
Held in sandwich betwe
On 2010-Aug-16 14:32:14 -0700, Bill Hart wrote:
>I'm also really wondering why cephes is in Sage. Unless there are two
>packages with the same name, it was last updated circa 1994 and uses
>non-portable long doubles. We've booted packages from Sage for much
>less felonious offences.
cephes is use
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Hector troy wrote:
> Hello people,
> I am newbie to the SAGE. I am using sage in Linux terminal (Ubuntu 10.04).
> Is there any command to clear scree while SAGE is running? Like ( Ctrl+L )
> works in normal terminal.
You should be able to add the following line t
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 5:12 AM, Hector troy wrote:
> Hello people,
> I am newbie to the SAGE. I am using sage in Linux terminal (Ubuntu 10.04).
> Is there any command to clear scree while SAGE is running?
Try this
sage: !clear
That would use the system command "clear".
--
Regards
Minh V
Hello people,
I am newbie to the SAGE. I am using sage in Linux terminal (Ubuntu 10.04).
Is there any command to clear scree while SAGE is running? Like ( Ctrl+L )
works in normal terminal.
Regards
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gr
New packages are up at #7344 and #7345
(http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7344 and
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7345) for review that should
hopefully work for all platforms.
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> SAGE_BINARY_BUILD was introduced as
I posted this example and a comment on this to #7392, just in case.
On Aug 17, 5:40 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 8/17/10 6:20 AM, vgermrk wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I discussed the following issue with �...@irc:
>
> > sage: rank(matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75]))
> > 2
>
> > gives a wrong answer.
>
> > Mu
On 8/17/10 9:40 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 8/17/10 6:20 AM, vgermrk wrote:
I discussed the following issue with @IRC:
sage: rank(matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75]))
2
gives a wrong answer.
Multiplying with a full rank matrix also gives unexpected results:
sage: rank( matrix(2,2,[1,0,0,1]) * m
On 8/17/10 6:20 AM, vgermrk wrote:
I discussed the following issue with @IRC:
sage: rank(matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75]))
2
gives a wrong answer.
Multiplying with a full rank matrix also gives unexpected results:
sage: rank( matrix(2,2,[1,0,0,1]) * matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75]) )
2
sag
The bug is apparently in $SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage/sage/matrix2.pyx,
in _echelon_in_place_classical
indeed:
sage: m=matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75])
sage: set_verbose(10)
sage: m.rank()
verbose 1 () generic in-place Gauss elimination on 2 x 2
matrix
verbose 1 () done with gauss echelon form (time = 0.0
I discussed the following issue with @IRC:
sage: rank(matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75]))
2
gives a wrong answer.
Multiplying with a full rank matrix also gives unexpected results:
sage: rank( matrix(2,2,[1,0,0,1]) * matrix(2,[1.5,1.75,-1.5,-1.75]) )
2
sage: rank( matrix(2,2,[1,0,1,1]) * mat
I'm not sure but I just did some googling and found "google apps"
after a bit of hunting. Do you think that might help?
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 7:17 AM, ancienthart wrote:
> I don't have access to file servers that I directly control/can upload
> to, but I would like to get it out there. Could
I don't have access to file servers that I directly control/can upload
to, but I would like to get it out there. Could you recommend a site I
could upload it to? The file is 2.5 Gb.
Joal Heagney
On Aug 15, 3:57 am, David Joyner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:16 PM, ancienthart wrote:
>
> .
At last, a contributiuon to this thread which actually addresses my
original question!
>> In contrast, it seems sympow is not used by many people. The fact there are
>> no bug reports of it not working on the public servers shows how little it
>> is used. (If someone actually tried to run many of
On 2010-08-15 21:14, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2010-08-15 18:59, John Cremona wrote:
>> My guess is that in the prime case it's easy to find the smallest
>> integer, and desirable that the 2 generators always have the form p,
>> alpha in that order with p the underlying prime. But it may well be
22 matches
Mail list logo
