Re: [sage-devel] Re: Runtimes of binary versus from-source

Hi This difference in runtime is gone now that the binary has been built on the same toolchain as the from-source compile. The binary/PPA runtime is now 12.5 seconds on a laptop CPU (negligibly close to the 11.5 seconds on a desktop CPU). So the runtime slowness seem related to the Ubuntu 10.04 b

Re: [sage-devel] How to correct this bug in power series substitution?

Le 10/07/2012 21:58, William Stein a écrit : On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Martin Raum wrote: Hallo all! I have found the following bug which mostly occurs when substituting power series over inexact rings. E.g. R. = CC[[]] x.subs(x = x**2) gives x. Same for the base field Qp(7). Qui

Re: [sage-devel] How to correct this bug in power series substitution?

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Martin Raum wrote: > Hallo all! > > I have found the following bug which mostly occurs when substituting power > series over inexact rings. E.g. > > R. = CC[[]] > x.subs(x = x**2) > > gives x. Same for the base field Qp(7). Quick remark. It is far, far better to

Re: [sage-devel] How to correct this bug in power series substitution?

> The reason is that the generic method subs iterates the generators of R > (in this case x) and checks whether any keyword matches the string > representation of that generator. But > > x._repr_() > > does not give 'x', but 0.0... + 1.0... x. > > There are two obvious ways to fix this: Change _rep

[sage-devel] How to correct this bug in power series substitution?

Hallo all! I have found the following bug which mostly occurs when substituting power series over inexact rings. E.g. R. = CC[[]] x.subs(x = x**2) gives x*. *Same for the base field Qp(7). The reason is that the generic method subs iterates the generators of R (in this case x) and checks whet

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code duplication and aliases in methods

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Julien Puydt wrote: > Le 10/07/2012 18:21, Keshav Kini a écrit : > >> Have you looked at the files? > > > Yes. > > >> What names would you suggest? > > > There are quite a few ideas : > > - matrix_constructions (copy, augment, submatrix, tensor_product, ...) ; > -

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code duplication and aliases in methods

Le 10/07/2012 18:21, Keshav Kini a écrit : Have you looked at the files? Yes. What names would you suggest? There are quite a few ideas : - matrix_constructions (copy, augment, submatrix, tensor_product, ...) ; - matrix_conversions (pari, maxima, singular, ...) ; - matrix_representations (

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code duplication and aliases in methods

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Keshav Kini wrote: > Julien Puydt writes: >> Le 10/07/2012 09:19, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : >>> On 2012-07-10 06:47, William Stein wrote: Seriously? You guys actually *want* a single 20,000 line Cython file? Why? The only argument you are giving is tha

[sage-devel] Re: Code duplication and aliases in methods

Julien Puydt writes: > Le 10/07/2012 09:19, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : >> On 2012-07-10 06:47, William Stein wrote: >>> Seriously? You guys actually *want* a single 20,000 line Cython file? >>> Why? The only argument you are giving is that you can't remember >>> which file something is in, so let

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code duplication and aliases in methods

Le 10/07/2012 09:19, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : On 2012-07-10 06:47, William Stein wrote: Seriously? You guys actually *want* a single 20,000 line Cython file? Why? The only argument you are giving is that you can't remember which file something is in, so let's just put everything in one massiv

Re: [sage-devel] vote required for (small) backward incompatible change

Le 10/07/2012 15:51, Frédéric Chapoton a écrit : There is already a patch in trac, solving this issue. Please vote for or against this change, and please review the ticket if you can. For the change. Snark on #sagemath -- -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com

[sage-devel] Re: vote required for (small) backward incompatible change

Andrea Lazzarotto writes: > Il giorno 10/lug/2012 15:51, "Frédéric Chapoton" ha > scritto: >> >> There is already a patch in trac, solving this issue. Please vote for or > against this change, and please review the ticket if you can. >> >> Cheers, >> Frederic >> > I'm not an expert, but in my opi

Re: [sage-devel] vote required for (small) backward incompatible change

Il giorno 10/lug/2012 15:51, "Frédéric Chapoton" ha scritto: > > There is already a patch in trac, solving this issue. Please vote for or against this change, and please review the ticket if you can. > > Cheers, > Frederic > I'm not an expert, but in my opinion if you have to correct a wrong resul

Re: [sage-devel] vote required for (small) backward incompatible change

BEFORE: namely, the 0 polynomial has one monomial, which is not a monomial, but the zero of the ground ring. AFTER: the result will be given by the empty list, which is the only sensible result. I am 100% with the proposed change. Zero shouldn't be a monomial. --- Charles Bouillaguet http://

[sage-devel] vote required for (small) backward incompatible change

Hello everybody, In ordre to solve the problem raised in trac #12706, it is necessary to make a backward incompatible change, namely : http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12706 BEFORE: at some point, in the doc, one can find something equ

Re: [sage-devel] sage compiling problem AMD

I replaced pkg/standard/atlas-3.8.4.p1.spkg with http://www.stp.dias.ie/~vbraun/Sage/spkg/atlas-3.9.84.spkg and the build succeeded :-) Thanks a lot. On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Volker Braun wrote: > Can you replace spkg/standard/atlas-3.8.4.p1.spkg with > > http://www.stp.dias.ie/~vbraun/S

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code duplication and aliases in methods

On 2012-07-10 06:47, William Stein wrote: > Seriously? You guys actually *want* a single 20,000 line Cython file? > Why? The only argument you are giving is that you can't remember > which file something is in, so let's just put everything in one > massive file. I'm clearly missing something.