[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

Hmm, it is just sitting there on that line again, is it expecting input? It seems to be passing all of the tests. On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:08:07 PM UTC-5, Evan Oman wrote: > > Awesome, installing python 2.7.5.p2 got me past the readline error and it > continued building from there. > > It

Re: [sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:51:46AM +, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> > Thus, it would certainly be a reasonable PEP to provide a framework in >> > Python to define custom infix operators (say, operator.compose), by >> > providing a charac

Re: [sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:26 PM, rjf wrote: > Maxima, part of Sage, has had an extensible (at run time) parser for > perhaps 35 years. > You could ask about the experience there, maybe read about the pros and > cons. > Or you could be more conventional and ignore others' past experience. :) >

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

Awesome, installing python 2.7.5.p2 got me past the readline error and it continued building from there. It ran for about 30 minutes(running a ton of sanity tests, a good sign?), then froze here for an hour or two: /cygdrive/c/cygwin//home/evan.oman/sage-6.1/local/var/tmp/sage/build/atlas-3.1

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

Paul, > Instead, I would advocate using a declarative domain specific language built > for semi-formalizing > mathematics The appeal of this paradigm is evident. It addresses a fundamentally important issue: how to structure the development process to encourage the code to reflect the mathemati

Re: [sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Niles Johnson wrote: > Second, I think your last sentence is too much of a stretch. It's fair to > say that Sage shipping an infix hack is (possibly) evidence that people > love infix operators. (Although the fact that it's not used much would > suggest that the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

First off, to start with a funny anecdote, I remember working with some of the early Sage devs way back in the day optimizing matrix multiplication and we were baffled by the fact that numpy somehow managed to have O(n^2) behavior into the thousand by thousand matrix range :). More serious respons

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:40:41 PM UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > >On that note, I think reviewers shouldn't hold up tickets because they > > don't like the current implementation without providing a working > > alternative and can demonstrate why it's better. > > Do you think that a pa

Re: [sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > First off, to start with a funny anecdote, I remember working with > some of the early Sage devs way back in the day optimizing matrix > multiplication and we were baffled by the fact that numpy somehow > managed to have O(n^2) behavior int

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

I am confused about what to do. Everyone seems to be assuming that one of Volker's or Nicolas' approaches must be right. It might very well be that both approaches are suboptimal compared to a third. Still, Nicolas' has the merit to be implemented. Let me explain: I support Nicolas' initiative an

Re: [sage-devel] Re: 2d interactive graphs

On the other hand, a student could combine the two ideas, or work on the interactive plots within the cloud, so as to prepare for a future move to a "personal" version. (Hint to students who read this.) Incidentally, the cloud interface looks really nice. It's kind of sad that I looked at it on

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

I did not look at the logs yet, but you definitely need python 2.7.5.p2 which is not in the 6.1 series. See http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15317 On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 7:32:28 PM UTC+1, Evan Oman wrote: > > Alright so I have attached the entire Python log so hopefully that will > contain wh

[sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

Maxima, part of Sage, has had an extensible (at run time) parser for perhaps 35 years. You could ask about the experience there, maybe read about the pros and cons. Or you could be more conventional and ignore others' past experience. :) What's "PEP" stand for? I assume that at least one of

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:36:01AM -0700, Niles Johnson wrote: >Oh -- maybe that's why I have a hard time understanding categories :) :-) >That makes sense -- I see the need for something along these >lines. After scanning the ticket discussion and documentation, I >think the pur

Re: [sage-devel] Re: 2d interactive graphs

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Jason Grout wrote: > On 3/10/14 7:18 PM, Gehad Elrobey wrote: >> >> hi , I am a software engineering student interested in gsoc 2d >> interactive graphs project. >> >> I Think that interactive 2d graphs is one interesting feature that must >> be added to both sage

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:42:04 PM UTC, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > If you want to get this ticket inside of Sage there is an easy way : > review it. +1 also would save me a lot of time -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsu

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

Helloo ! > I agree with John. I actually think Nicolas is quite patient trying to answer > all questions. You are so kind. > My suggestion would be either for Volker to implement his alternative on a > different ticket, so we > can see it in action and test it, or to let Nicolas' patch go

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

On 3/11/14 1:20 PM, John H Palmieri wrote: > > > On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:40:41 PM UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > >On that note, I think reviewers shouldn't hold up tickets because > they > > don't like the current implementation without providing a working > > alternative

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

Hey John no worries, I was only answering Travis' post and this (rethorical) question was just meant as a way to show that I did not concur with his view that reviewers should have to implement their remarks when the review gets long. Nathann On Tuesday, 11 March 2014, John H Palmieri wrote: >

[sage-devel] Re: No such file or directory

On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 5:40:59 PM UTC, Simon King wrote: > > Hi Sam, > > On 2014-03-11, Sam Moore > wrote: > > Been using sage happily for months, but now when I try to open it > (sage./ > > in terminal) > > Do you perhaps intended to do ./sage and not sage./ ? > > Best regards, > Simo

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:40:41 PM UTC-7, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > >On that note, I think reviewers shouldn't hold up tickets because they > > don't like the current implementation without providing a working > > alternative and can demonstrate why it's better. > > Do you think that a pa

[sage-devel] Re: 2d interactive graphs

On 3/10/14 7:18 PM, Gehad Elrobey wrote: hi , I am a software engineering student interested in gsoc 2d interactive graphs project. I Think that interactive 2d graphs is one interesting feature that must be added to both sage-nb and sage cloud. In the Projects ideas its mentioned that this featu

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

>On that note, I think reviewers shouldn't hold up tickets because they > don't like the current implementation without providing a working > alternative and can demonstrate why it's better. Do you think that a patch should automatically be merged when it has been waiting for a reviewer for a

[sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

Hey everyone, I've been using #10963 in developing #14901 (Lie algebras). I first gave 'Lie' as an axiom of NonAssociativeNonUnitalAlgebras (which I just asked Nicolas for how to do it without really looking at the examples), but decided that I didn't want _mul_() to give the Lie bracket, so

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Call for vote about ticket #10963: axioms and more functorial constructions

On Monday, March 10, 2014 1:45:56 PM UTC, Nicolas M. Thiéry wrote: > > I am happy to change those error messages for something more helpful; > What do you suggest? > > - ``Unknown axiom name 'Endlich'. Please add it to > sage.categories.category_with_axiom.all_axioms'' > - ``Axiom 'Endlich' not

[sage-devel] Re: No such file or directory

Hi Sam, On 2014-03-11, Sam Moore wrote: > Been using sage happily for months, but now when I try to open it (sage./ > in terminal) Do you perhaps intended to do ./sage and not sage./ ? Best regards, Simon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-dev

[sage-devel] The dev release download page is out of date

It points to 6.1.beta1: http://www.sagemath.org/download-latest.html -- 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 email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To po

[sage-devel] No such file or directory

Been using sage happily for months, but now when I try to open it (sage./ in terminal) I get the message 'No such file or directory'. This started happening after I installed 'graphviz'- I have since removed this but makes no difference. I have even tried rerunning the installer, but it seems to

[sage-devel] Re: RFC: draft PEP for adding @ as a matrix multiplication operator to Python

I actually just have a minor complaint about the very last sentence. In the last section you write *Use overloading hacks to define a "new infix operator" like *dot*, as in a > well-known Python recipe:* (See: > [2]

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

That is what singular does, right? El martes, 11 de marzo de 2014 11:23:57 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik escribió: > > On 2014-03-11, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:20:08 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > >> > >> Is it possible now to build sage on cygwin and obtain some

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

On 2014-03-11, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > > On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:20:08 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: >> >> Is it possible now to build sage on cygwin and obtain something that can >> be distributed? In that case, maybe we should include that in the download >> section. >> > I'd say mostly y

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:20:08 AM UTC+1, mmarco wrote: > > Is it possible now to build sage on cygwin and obtain something that can > be distributed? In that case, maybe we should include that in the download > section. > I'd say mostly yes, just like on linux. But some people said we shou

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

Is it possible now to build sage on cygwin and obtain something that can be distributed? In that case, maybe we should include that in the download section. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

In fact you would need http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15317 which is merged but in a 6.2 beta. On Tuesday, March 11, 2014 9:15:53 AM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > > You can have a look at http://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/Cygwin64Port. > My last try was with 5.13 on Cygwin64, but some of the iss

[sage-devel] Re: Building Sage with Cygwin 32 bit

You can have a look at http://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/Cygwin64Port. My last try was with 5.13 on Cygwin64, but some of the issues can be 32/64 agnostic and 5.13 and 6.1 are not that different. The only one on the page which might affect you at this pooint is either rebasing or a problem with syste