On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>> (4) Perhaps I could configure things differently, but littering my
>> directory with reject files when things don't apply cleanly vs. git's
>> inline
>>
>> << OLD
>> ...
>>
>> ...
NEW
>>
>> is so
So we're now vastly off-topic from Python 3 formatting, but... :)
On Fri, 01 Feb 2013 at 03:50PM -0600, William Stein wrote:
> I greatly prefer the incredibly simple and straightforward merge
> markup with git to using any of the several sophisticated 3-way merge
> tools that I've used (in OS X a
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Keshav Kini wrote:
> Robert Bradshaw writes:
>> (4) Perhaps I could configure things differently, but littering my
>> directory with reject files when things don't apply cleanly vs. git's
>> inline
>>
>> << OLD
>> ...
>>
>> ...
NEW
>>
>> is so
Robert Bradshaw writes:
> (4) Perhaps I could configure things differently, but littering my
> directory with reject files when things don't apply cleanly vs. git's
> inline
>
> << OLD
> ...
>
> ...
>>> NEW
>
> is so much easier to deal with (as well as being a lot safer in making
On 1/7/13 11:09 AM, sage-googlesu...@lma.metelu.net wrote:
here is a link to the self-replicating live USB we discussed about in the Bobo
2012 sage days thread.
http://sagedebianlive.metelu.net/
I just downloaded this to sage.math so that it is mirrored in the U.S
(at http://sage.math.washin
On 2013-02-01 15:23, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> Any clue on how much extra time and space this would take to have the
> gcc compilation include the 32 bits libraries? On my machine, I get:
>
> > du -sch /lib/i386-linux-gnu
> 7,6M/lib/i386-linux-gnu
Those are system-specific librari
I have a patch ready which massively speeds up determinants over GF(p)
and which modestly speeds up determinants over ZZ, only by using
existing code in a better way and better tuning (no new algorithms).
Results on sage.math:
*Before* (middle out of 5):
sage: %time random_matrix(ZZ, 160).det()
C
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 06:40:01PM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2013-01-31 18:31, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> > How shall we proceed? Would it make sense to configure gcc's
> > compilation to build and install the 32bits libraries?
> I wouldn't do this for all installations, I see little benefi
Hi Simon,
> A cached method uses the name of the wrapped method to determine the
> name of an attribute used for storing the cache. So, defining a cached
> method under one name and storing it under another name is asking for
> trouble.
>
> I think at some point we have discussed introducin
Hi Florent,
On 2013-01-30, Florent Hivert wrote:
> It's not clear to me from the documentation if the following behavior is a bug
> or a known bad use of cached method:
>
> class Bla(object):
> @cached_method
> def truc(self):
> print "Computing truc"
> return 1
> trac
On Fri, 1 Feb 2013, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
If I understand correctly, after conjugacy_class(self, g) is done it needs
only say conjugacy_class(self, g1)==conjugacy_class(self, g2) to check if
This is not efficient - -
True.
Should Sage aim to efficient code whenever something is added, or s
On 2013-02-01, Jori Mantysalo wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Javier López Peña wrote:
>
>> there are indeed many GAP method that are not exposed to the sage library.
>> A while back I wrote a wrapper for (some) conjugacy classes methods:
>> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7886
>
>> My pat
On Friday, February 1, 2013 11:41:40 AM UTC, jori.ma...@uta.fi wrote:
> If I understand correctly, after conjugacy_class(self, g) is done it needs
> only say conjugacy_class(self, g1)==conjugacy_class(self, g2) to check if
> two groups are conjugates. (But still, for convenience there should be
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013, Javier López Peña wrote:
there are indeed many GAP method that are not exposed to the sage library.
A while back I wrote a wrapper for (some) conjugacy classes methods:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7886
My patches don't merge anymore, but I will try to rebase
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2013-02-01 00:17, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Jeroen Demeyer
>> wrote:
>>> On 2013-01-31 20:42, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I think this will be much easier to do once we've moved to git
>>> Why? What h
15 matches
Mail list logo
