You need to restart the notebook since the test output is cached...
On Monday, July 1, 2013 9:36:36 PM UTC-4, Ursula wrote:
>
> On 7/1/2013 8:26 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> > The interface checks whether the utility program "points2placingtriang"
> > from TOPCOM is available, and didn't find it
This sounds even worse, the triangulation module is pure python but you got
an exception ignored which must have come from some C/Cython code.
On Monday, July 1, 2013 5:22:44 PM UTC-4, William wrote:
>
> Exception pexpect.ExceptionPexpect: ExceptionPexpect() in object _TOPCOM_exec at 0x9185c30
On 7/1/2013 8:26 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
The interface checks whether the utility program "points2placingtriang"
from TOPCOM is available, and didn't find it in your install. Do you
have Sage's current spkg of TOPCOM installed or some other version?
I ran
install_package('TOPCOM')
from the no
The interface checks whether the utility program "points2placingtriang"
from TOPCOM is available, and didn't find it in your install. Do you have
Sage's current spkg of TOPCOM installed or some other version?
Just for the record, you almost certainly want
regular.restrict_to_star_triangulation
There is certainly an opportunity to write a program that works like this:
to simplify abs(f(x)) test to see if f(x) is real for all possible values
of x.
then find some g(x) such that g(x)^2=f(x). That is, f(x) is a perfect
square.
In such a case abs(f(x)) is equal to f(x).
It has rathe
On Sunday, June 30, 2013 1:23:50 PM UTC-7, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote:
...
> . It is not optimal but it works:
>
It works on this example in your opinion. If you want to deal with square
roots in this
case using some bogus relationship between the choice of branch and some
alleged
internal "si
I'm running sage-5.10.rc0.
When I evaluate the following code:
p = ReflexivePolytope(3,2)
points = p.points().columns()
pointConfig = PointConfiguration(points)
regular = pointConfig.restrict_to_regular_triangulations(True)
regular
I get the error:
You must install TOPCOM to test for regularity
On 07/01/2013 03:55 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 07/01/2013 03:37 PM, Joris Vankerschaver wrote:
>>
>> sage: u = var('u')
>> sage: assume(u, 'real')
>
> This makes an assumption in Maxima, where most of the symbolic algebra
> takes place.
>
>
>> sage: u = var('u', domain='real')
>
> This se
On 07/01/2013 03:37 PM, Joris Vankerschaver wrote:
>
> sage: u = var('u')
> sage: assume(u, 'real')
This makes an assumption in Maxima, where most of the symbolic algebra
takes place.
> sage: u = var('u', domain='real')
This sets a flag in pynac, which does nothing as far as I can tell.
--
Y
On Friday, February 15, 2013 11:31:41 AM UTC, Julius wrote:
>
>
> With sage 5.6
> sage: assume(x, 'real')
> sage: (abs(sin(x))^2).simplify_full()
> abs(sin(x))^2
>
> For trigonometric simplifications, this is very inconvenient. For example
> sage: (abs(sin(x))^2 + abs(cos(x))^2).sim
On Monday, July 1, 2013 5:37:02 AM UTC-4, Robert Pollak wrote:
>
> Hello list!
>
> I have already posted the following question to the Maxima mailing list
> [1],
> but I am not sure whether corresponding improvements should go into Sage
> or Maxima.
>
> In Sage 5.4, when I enter
>
> solve(a
Hi,
i first want to say that i love you all, i am not deeply involved in
sage-graphs nor sage-combinat, nor representing any community. Just my
two cents about this thread and the related tickets.
- I disagree that this thread reached a consensus.
- I disagree that functionalities in Sage can no
> This is exactly what the patch I posted does.
>_<
Yeah. Right.
Just lost another occasion to keep quiet :-P
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an ema
> Looks like the code that you
> change does not come from the same patch, but it looks to me that if a
> PermutationGroup handles both 1, ...,n and "a", "b", "c" as its
> elements, then I expect that it should handle 0, 1, 2 as it handles
> "a", "b", "c", that it to say probably with labels, and a
Hell !!!
> Here's a ticket with patch: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14845
H.. A long time ago I wrote a very nasty patch that prevented one
from building a Permutation on any set which was not 1, ..., n because
I got angry at the fact that many methods of Permutations
Here's a ticket with patch: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14845
--Mike
--Mike
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> (#14772 is a Permutations patch currently waiting for a review which touches
> a lot of things. Sooo if you want to patch it somehow, you will hav
(#14772 is a Permutations patch currently waiting for a review which
touches a lot of things. Sooo if you want to patch it somehow, you will
have to give it a look)
Nathann
On Monday, July 1, 2013 2:11:10 AM UTC+2, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> A better workaround is something like:
>
> sage: P
Hi Dox,
In addition to the link that Leif provided, it would be good to open a
ticket on trac first with a description of the changes you propose to make.
Let me know if you need any further help. I'd be happy to review your patch
when you're done.
All the best,
Joris
On Friday, June 28, 20
Hi all,
Following RJF's suggestion, I played around with Maxima for a little while
to see where the problem arises. As far as I can tell, this is again a
problem with the fact that simplify_radical gets called in simplify_full
(see #12737). The problem that I'm seeing used to be absent when
s
Hello list!
I have already posted the following question to the Maxima mailing list [1],
but I am not sure whether corresponding improvements should go into Sage or
Maxima.
In Sage 5.4, when I enter
solve(abs((x-1)/(x-5)) <= 1/3, x)
I get the following DNF as output
#0: solve_rat_ineq(ineq=ab
20 matches
Mail list logo
