On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
> Does anyone happen to know why this happens? I have a feeling it is going to
> annoy my sometime soon.
>
> Look how long it takes to import mpmath:
>
> $ time sage -python -c "import mpmath; print mpmath.__version__"0.17
mpmath takes advan
Does anyone happen to know why this happens? I have a feeling it is going
to annoy my sometime soon.
Look how long it takes to import mpmath:
$ time sage -python -c "import mpmath; print mpmath.__version__"0.17
real 0m0.809s
user 0m0.708s
sys 0m0.076s
compared to the time it takes to import the
Hi David (cc: sage-devel),
sage: float('nan') > 1
BOOM!
I've posted a patch at trac 12149 [1] to fix this year-old bug.
Somebody please referee it:
[1] http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12149
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
On 12/12/2011 10:05 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Monday, December 12, 2011 5:13:00 PM UTC-8, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
Is there an easy way to print a symbolic expression so that it's valid
python code? E.g.
2*x^2 --> QQ(2) * x**QQ(2)
How about
sage: preparse('2*x^2')
'Integer(2)
I'm doing some integrals:
sage: a, b, t = var('a b t')
sage: f(a,b,t) = sin(t)^2/(a + b*cos(t))^2
sage: integrate(f(3/2,1,t), (t,0,2*pi))
-2/5*(sqrt(5) - 3)*pi*sqrt(5)
Okay, that's fine. But
sage: integrate(f(1.5,1,t), (t,0,2*pi))
blows up with:
RuntimeError: ECL says: Error executing code in
On Monday, December 12, 2011 5:13:00 PM UTC-8, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> Is there an easy way to print a symbolic expression so that it's valid
> python code? E.g.
>
>2*x^2 --> QQ(2) * x**QQ(2)
>
How about
sage: preparse('2*x^2')
'Integer(2)*x**Integer(2)'
--
John
--
To post
I plan to shut down the experimental flask.sagenb.org server tomorrow.
There has been a warning message on the server for about a month now to
this effect. We plan to keep a backup of the worksheets around.
If you have worksheets on flask.sagenb.org that you still want to use,
please move the
Is there an easy way to print a symbolic expression so that it's valid
python code? E.g.
2*x^2 --> QQ(2) * x**QQ(2)
I frequently deal with expressions that are about two pages long and
would like to be able to copy/paste them without cleaning up the code
and making the expression importable
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:58, David Roe wrote:
> >> The extended (Brent) tables I mentioned in my original e-mail are a
> >> bit tricker. Now the load time is significant: 3s currently (using a
> >> pickled dictionary), though I could probably drop that to 2s with
> >> either some Cython or a
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:08, David Roe wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:33, R. Andrew Ohana
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:12, David Roe wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes. I labelled all of the columns as index=True.
> >
> >
> > You should not be indexing all columns, only the ones you are ma
Thanks Volker. Now I have the following code. I need to take the
Python function callback which takes one argument and create a void
(*callback) (uint32_t) function pointer to pass to
self.thisptr.generatePrimes. How do I do this? Right now I get the
error "Cannot convert Python object to 'void
> return self.thisptr.generatePrimes...
tries to return a C void, but
> cdef generatePrimes
is implicitly declared as returning a python object (try cdef
void generatePrimes or return None)
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gro
While writing a Cython wrapper for primesieve (http://code.google.com/
p/primesieve/) I have been unable to wrap the generatePrimes function
because of the function pointer argument.
I get "Cannot convert 'void' to Python object" on the last line
below. Please help me. I have been reading the Cyt
On 12/12/11 8:48 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
When I was working on similar issues for printing real numbers (i.e.,
whether to truncate digits, etc.), Carl Witty brought up a very good point.
Just to follow up, Carl Witty's point is here:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7682#comment:32
I
>> So now I have hacked together a patch that works as I will it, both in
>> the shell and notebook. I think it is a bug that the latex
>> representation currently ignores the repr-value of the finite field.
>> What do you other say?
Agreed: latex should respect the repr-value.
>> And as long as
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:33, R. Andrew Ohana wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:12, David Roe wrote:
>>
>> Yes. I labelled all of the columns as index=True.
>
>
> You should not be indexing all columns, only the ones you are making many
> queries upon.
By "making queries upon" do you mean ap
>> First of all, size on disk. Storing the Cunningham database using a
>> list and dictionary requires 1.04MB. The database takes 10.7MB
>> (perhaps I chose a poor representation. I've included my skeleton
>> below).
>
>
> This shouldn't be too much of a concern, assuming the source text files
>
On Dec 11, 8:26 pm, William Stein wrote:
>
> Can you please post your code athttp://pastebin.com/or something,
> since putting it in email results in it getting all mangled by some
> email clients?
>
> Thanks!
>
> William
Sure thing.
A sage worksheet can be downloaded here:
http://www.uwosh.e
On 12/12/11 8:27 AM, Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote:
On Dec 12, 11:35 am, javier wrote:
Hi Johan,
do you have the "typeset" box checked in your notebook?
If so, then things are displayed using the latex method
instead of the repr one.
Cheers,
Javier
OF COURSE! Thanks for telling me. I would have
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:12, David Roe wrote:
> Yes. I labelled all of the columns as index=True.
You should not be indexing all columns, only the ones you are making many
queries upon.
> I don't know if that's sufficient, or if the size-on-disk would be a lot
> less without redundant indi
On Dec 12, 11:35 am, javier wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> do you have the "typeset" box checked in your notebook?
> If so, then things are displayed using the latex method
> instead of the repr one.
>
> Cheers,
> Javier
OF COURSE! Thanks for telling me. I would have thought that I had
enough Sage-experi
>> but my guess is that it would take about
>> 90ms (since a single query takes about 80ms to execute).
>
>
> Did you use an index with the table?
Yes. I labelled all of the columns as index=True. I don't know if
that's sufficient, or if the size-on-disk would be a lot less without
redundant ind
On 12/12/11 7:38 AM, David Roe wrote:
but my guess is that it would take about
90ms (since a single query takes about 80ms to execute).
Did you use an index with the table?
Jason
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an em
I just did some experiments with SQL. I wanted to see if people had
thoughts on the tradeoffs before proceeding.
First of all, size on disk. Storing the Cunningham database using a
list and dictionary requires 1.04MB. The database takes 10.7MB
(perhaps I chose a poor representation. I've inclu
Hi Nicolas,
On Dec 9, 11:11 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> Just an algorithmic suggestion: what about building the conjugacy
> class recursively by conjugating by generators? This is a one liner
> with TransitiveIdeal; and roughly speaking, writing C the resulting
> conjugacy class, that would
Hi Johan,
do you have the "typeset" box checked in your notebook?
If so, then things are displayed using the latex method
instead of the repr one.
Cheers,
Javier
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+u
Hi all
I work a lot with finite fields and polynomials over these, and the
standard string representation of finite field elements as polynomials
is not very convenient for me; I would much prefer to represent each
non-zero element as a power of the field's generator. I am having
trouble making the
On 2011-12-12 00:15, Simon King wrote:
> Eventually, it was a one-line change in 29 packages. See #12131, which
> is now needing review. I made it a blocker for sage-5.0, but if people
> think that openSUSE 12.1 could already be supported by sage-4.8, I
> wouldn't object...
If it gets reviewed soon
28 matches
Mail list logo
