This is really funny!
sage: ((-1)**(1/2))**(0.5)
None
sage: ((-1)**(0.5))**(0.5)
0.707106781186548 + 0.707106781186547*I
sage: type(((-1)**(0.5)))
sage: type((-1)**(1/2))
sage: type(I)
sage: type(I**(1/2))
sage: I**(1/2)
sqrt(I)
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 1:58:24 PM UTC+8, Willia
Yeah, it has to do with how Pynac and Sage recursively call each
other. Certainly a blocker in my book, and it looks like it's been
around a while (possibly since the introduction of Pynac, at least
since we were able to simplify SR(4)^(1/2)). I hope to have a patch up
soon.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 a
On 2012-02-14 23:24, entropy wrote:
> woohoo! Success as well using
>
> $ CC=clang CXX=clang++ MAKE="make -j1" ./sage -f spkg/standard/
> gcc-4.6.2.spkg
>
> Successfully installed gcc-4.6.2
> Now cleaning up tmp files.
> Finished installing gcc-4.6.2.spkg (!!)
Could you do the same with SAGE_CH
On 2012-02-15 03:10, John H Palmieri wrote:
> Why would it switch over to gcc? Wouldn't this use clang for any spkg
> which respects the CC environment variable, regardless of the presence
> of SAGE_ROOT/local/bin/gcc?
Currently, I set up #12369 such that it always uses gcc if the GCC spkg
has bee
On 2012-02-14 23:57, entropy wrote:
> To be clear, after gcc-4.6.2 built and installed, in
> order to restart the build process, I simply typed "make" again in the
> sage root directory. Is it necessary to modify this command if one
> restarts a build process? Or is my problem that the built proces
*bump*
On 2012-02-07 23:57, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Something I did on a long boring train ride: remove some of the Debian
> cruft left in the scripts. Please review #12470:
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12470
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12511 is now awaiting review.
Thanks, Robert!
-Keshav
Join us in #sagemath on irc.freenode.net !
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@google
On 02/15/2012 12:34 AM, William Stein wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Dr. David Kirkby
wrote:
On 02/15/12 05:58 AM, William Stein wrote:
Hi,
A student in my class (Andrey Sarantsev) just pointed out to me that
in Sage-4.8 and Sage-5.0, we have
sage: I^(0.5)
None
What? That's not
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 21:07, Stephen Montgomery-Smith
wrote:
> I have a concern over I^(0.5). It is plus or minus (1+I)/sqrt(2). The
> difficulty I have is with the "plus or minus". It is possible to define the
> positive square root of a real number so that sqrt(ab)=sqrt(a)*sqrt(b). But
> y
Yes, that is a known error. I have been looking for it for a year.
There is no where in the jmol_lib.js that calls for anything called
JmolApplet. All the applets are numbered and what is actually asked
for is JmolApplet0.jar. It does not seem to affect the functioning of
Jmol. I am assuming we
With SAGE_CHECK=yes it does indeed seem to build a broken gcc:
...
checking for long long... yes
checking size of long long... configure: error: in `/Users/jberwald/
src/sage-5.0.beta3-gcc/spkg/build/gcc-4.6.2/gcc-build/gcc':
configure: error: cannot compute sizeof (long long)
See `config.log' for
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:55 PM, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:42 PM, R. Andrew Ohana
> wrote:
>> You could also try
>>
>> $ CC=clang CXX=clang++ MAKE="make -j1" ./sage -f spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
>>
>> One of the main points of the gcc spkg is because llvm-gcc is buggy,
>
On Feb 15, 12:46 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 2/15/12 12:22 AM, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
>
> > On Feb 13, 5:15 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> >> Very cool interact (that second one). I fixed the problem. However,
> >> you need to add:
>
> >> u,v=var('u,v')
>
> >> at the top before the definition of t
On 2/15/12 9:15 AM, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
On Feb 15, 12:46 am, Jason Grout wrote:
On 2/15/12 12:22 AM, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
On Feb 13, 5:15 am, Jason Groutwrote:
Very cool interact (that second one). I fixed the problem. However,
you need to add:
u,v=var('u,v')
at the to
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:22:32 -0800 (PST)
Keshav Kini wrote:
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12511 is now awaiting
> review. Thanks, Robert!
Robert's patch now has positive review and is waiting to be merged.
Thanks to Robert for the quick fix, Keshav and aapitzsch for their
help.
Th
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 10:50:52 AM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> John, entropy, Could you try the following:
>
> $ rm spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
> $ MAKE="make -j1" SAGE_CHECK=yes CFLAGS="-O0" ./sage -f
> spkg/standard/gcc-4.6.2.spkg
>
> If it fails, send me spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
>
It fa
> > expected behavior.
>
> It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
> sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
>
> > I think at this point manual intervention is required. Or was there
> > something else you were thinking it should do (because clearly you
>
On Feb 15, 1:31 pm, kcrisman wrote:
> > > expected behavior.
>
> > It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
> > sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
>
> > > I think at this point manual intervention is required. Or was there
> > > something else you
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> > expected behavior.
>>
>> It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
>> sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
>>
>> > I think at this point manual intervention is required. Or was there
>> > something
On 2/15/12 12:59 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM, kcrisman wrote:
expected behavior.
It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
I think at this point manual intervention is required. O
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 2/15/12 12:59 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
> expected behavior.
It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
sandpile.py! I need to fig
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> > expected behavior.
>>
>> It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
>> sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
>>
>> > I think at this point manual intervention is required. Or was there
>> > something
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:32 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>
> On Feb 15, 1:31 pm, kcrisman wrote:
>> > > expected behavior.
>>
>> > It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
>> > sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
>>
>> > > I think at this point manual inter
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:19 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> On 2/15/12 12:59 PM, William Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>> expected behavior.
>
>
> It does always timeout. The re
On Feb 15, 8:38 am, Keshav Kini wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 21:07, Stephen Montgomery-Smith
>
> wrote:
> > I have a concern over I^(0.5). It is plus or minus (1+I)/sqrt(2). The
> > difficulty I have is with the "plus or minus". It is possible to define the
> > positive square root of a
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:59 AM, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>>> > expected behavior.
>>>
>>> It does always timeout. The regular doctests take 1300 seconds for
>>> sandpile.py! I need to figure out what's going on there.
>>>
>>> > I think at this poi
> IMHO, a native port of Sage to Windows could not be done in a week or two.
> Perhaps a Cygwin port could, but I'm talking of a native port, where the
> code runs directly on Windows, without any Linux virtual machines,
> emulators or similar.
I see no reason to reject MinGW, Cygwin, or other li
On Feb 13, 10:05 pm, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Monday, February 13, 2012 9:34:17 PM UTC-8, rjf wrote:
>
> > shame on you for turning your back on what is still the
> > most wide-spread operating system (or family of systems) on home
> > and office computers.
>
> The most common home computer is a
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:32:36 PM UTC-8, rjf wrote:
>
> The number of downloads on windows is about 216,000 since August.
> The number of downloads on Linux is about 675.
>
Many distributions ship with a maxima package, for example Fedora.
Microsoft is not distributing maxima with Win
In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
> On 02/15/12 01:40 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
>> While it would be an funny retro-computing exercise,
>
> No, it would be a painful one. Even if you could install it, most modern
> software would not run on it.
>
>> I don't think Windows
>> NT 3.51 ca
On Feb 15, 7:22 pm, rjf wrote:
> > IMHO, a native port of Sage to Windows could not be done in a week or two.
> > Perhaps a Cygwin port could, but I'm talking of a native port, where the
> > code runs directly on Windows, without any Linux virtual machines,
> > emulators or similar.
>
> I see no
On 2/15/12 7:10 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
Many distributions ship with a maxima package, for example Fedora.
Microsoft is not distributing maxima with Windows. Hence only windows
users will download maxima from sourceforge.
Not to mention that the sf number doesn't count, for example, Sage
distr
I notice on this ticket[1] that I didn't get emailed about the updated
patch from tmonteil. An updated attachment should work the same as a
comment, right?
Is this something that can be changed? I don't want to lose track of
tickets I'm in the process of reviewing.
[1] http://trac.sagemath.
See this incredibly old Trac trac ticket:
http://trac.edgewall.org/ticket/2259
It looks like even though our version of Trac is pretty old, even
upgrading to the latest Trac might not solve this...
-Keshav
Join us in #sagemath on irc.freenode.net !
--
To post to this group, send an email
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 7:59:16 AM UTC-8, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 10:50:52 AM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>>
>> John, entropy, Could you try the following:
>>
>> $ rm spkg/logs/gcc-4.6.2.log
>> $ MAKE="make -j1" SAGE_CHECK=yes CFLAGS="-O0" ./sage -f
>
Robert Bradshaw writes:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> You correctly interpreted my response, and I agree with your conclusions. I
>> haven't used the sage branch-handling code in years.
>
> I used them extensively when (1) I was working on my thesis, and
> wanted a
On 02/16/12 01:44 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
In gmane.comp.mathematics.sage.devel, you wrote:
On 02/15/12 01:40 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
While it would be an funny retro-computing exercise,
No, it would be a painful one. Even if you could install it, most modern
software would not run on it.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Jason Grout
>> wrote:
>>> You correctly interpreted my response, and I agree with your conclusions. I
>>> haven't used the sage branch-handling code in years.
>>
>> I used them e
38 matches
Mail list logo
