this does not remind me of anything except
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/3603 which is surely unrelated (different
backend) and http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/13447 but not so related
either.
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 1:03:15 AM UTC+2, Volker Braun wrote:
I was dabbling in
Does it also leak with older version of Sage?
--
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 post to this group, send
On 2014-09-09, Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 05:00:29PM +0200, Nathann Cohen wrote:
I just had a quick look at it, and the following looks downright
scary:
It is one of this code's many wonders. Also, note that :
sage:
Pretty much anything in parentheses can result in a callable object:
sage: R.x,y = QQ[]
sage: (x+y+1)(2,3)
6
Though we could check for tuples containing only integers, that is a
reasonable regex. Though I'm a bit worried about the whole
preparsing-with-regex approach. The more you layer on top
How about going all the way and permit proper GAP-like syntax for
permutations?
That is, the preparser should replace
(1,2,3)(4,5)(7,8) with Permutation(['(1,2,3)','(4,5)','(7,8)'])
Hmmm... And what about circular permutations ?
Should (1,2,3) return a permutation instead of a tuple ?
Does leak with 6.0, I don't have an older version around to test.
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 9:31:51 AM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
Does it also leak with older version of Sage?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-devel group.
To
Hi folks,
I thought i might ask this question on this list as well.
I once thought of compiling Sage 5.13 for the raspberry pi but as far
as i can tell it was not so easy at that time a few months ago.
Now we have Sage 6.3 so i wonder if this got any easier?
I am running Raspbian (Debian 7
It is theoretically possible, but you would need swap memory (the RAM of
the device is not enough), which would be very slow (i don'trecommend doing
it using the SD card as swap device, too much read/write for it), so go for
a USB hard drive. And even then, it will be quite slow (the USB port
On 2014-09-10, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote:
How about going all the way and permit proper GAP-like syntax for
permutations?
That is, the preparser should replace
(1,2,3)(4,5)(7,8) with Permutation(['(1,2,3)','(4,5)','(7,8)'])
Hmmm... And what about circular permutations ?
Hi,
thanks for the suggestion with the hard drive.
i might try that one.
how can i do the swap to disk thing?
never have done that.
btw i have more linux boxes but those are all 32 bit (x86) machines.
so i don't know how to do a compilation for armv6l on those.
maybe someone could tell me
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 12:18:40PM -0700, Volker Braun wrote:
On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 6:07:49 PM UTC+1, Nicolas M. Thiéry wrote:
I agree it's not great. But do you have a better proposal?
How about being explicit, aka the principle of least astonishment?
M.permute_columns(sigma,
yes, that's a good idea.
I also would prefer having Permutation0 and Permutation1 classes,
and Permutation=Permutation1 by default
(so that you can just say Permutation=Permutation0 right at the
beginning of your code, and proceed as you like).
I believe that having two kinds of permutations
Just for fun:
sage: Permutation([3,2,1]).inversions() # 0-based
[(1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 3)]
sage: Permutation([3,2,1]).bruhat_inversions() # 0-based
[[0, 1], [1, 2]]
This code is a joke.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-devel group.
To
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 2:11:17 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote:
1) Change the current code to handle 0-based AND 1-based permutations; or
2) Have two versions of each function
IMHO its rather easy. You never really do arithmetic with the indices in
combinatorics as they are just
Indeed it should basically work out of the box if you make some swap space
available (let's say 1 gbyte).
At least it used to do, possibly with a few trivial fixes (and I surely
opened tickets on trac for them, also see
Upon closer inspection, the leak always happens when libsingular evaluates
a polynomial to a constant. Its just more noticeable in GF(11^2) because we
leak more memory per iteration.
Fix is at http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16958
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
Rather than having Permutation0 and Permutation1, I would rather have an
object which is a 0-based permutation attached with a set on which it's
acting. A classic permutation would be a 0-based permutation acting on
{1,...,n}. The idea is to separate the permutation process itself (which is
Hello !
and the
combinatorial object Permutation which should stay 1-based.
I disagree.
And yes Nathan, everyone agrees there are some lack of consistency and the
one you mention about bruhat_inversions and inversions is definitely one.
It is not what I say. What I say is that 1-based
It is not bluff Nathann. And it's no bluff either to say that many many
valuable people would just stop using Sage if it stopped handling 1-based
permutations. Sage is a mathematical software and it makes sense that it
should print and accept inputs of the mathematical objects I use the way I
use
I'm forwarding this to the sage-devel list, since sage-cloud isn't
sage (and sage-cloud isn't FOSS, so can't participate in this
program), but Sage can.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Андрей Ширшов sh.andr@gmail.com
Date: Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 4:19 AM
Subject: [sage-cloud]
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 8:36:47 AM UTC-7, Viviane Pons wrote:
It is not bluff Nathann. And it's no bluff either to say that many many
valuable people would just stop using Sage if it stopped handling 1-based
permutations. Sage is a mathematical software and it makes sense that it
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:38:50 AM UTC-7, Nils Bruin wrote:
sage: Permutation([0,1,2])
aw shoot. The problem is there already, because we're defining permutations
by *ordered list of images* rather than as a composition of cycles. That
means the base actually is important right
I've already asked on the mentor list about this, but I don't remember
any reactions (but I was on a conference and didn't follow
everything). IIRC, deadline is this Friday. I can register Sage and
see what happens …
H
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 6:52 PM, William A Stein wst...@uw.edu wrote:
I'm
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Harald Schilly
harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote:
I've already asked on the mentor list about this, but I don't remember
any reactions (but I was on a conference and didn't follow
everything). IIRC, deadline is this Friday. I can register Sage and
see what
Am Mittwoch, 10. September 2014 19:54:06 UTC+2 schrieb Nils Bruin:
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:38:50 AM UTC-7, Nils Bruin wrote:
sage: Permutation([0,1,2])
aw shoot. The problem is there already, because we're defining
permutations by *ordered list of images* rather than as a
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 11:51:55 AM UTC-7, Martin R wrote:
I think that's what PermutationGroup and PermutationGroupElement do.
No:
sage: PermutationGroupElement((2,3,4)).parent()
Symmetric group of order 4! as a permutation group
sage: PermutationGroupElement([1,2,3]).parent()
On 2014-09-10, Nils Bruin nbr...@sfu.ca wrote:
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:38:50 AM UTC-7, Nils Bruin wrote:
sage: Permutation([0,1,2])
aw shoot. The problem is there already, because we're defining permutations
by *ordered list of images* rather than as a composition of cycles.
Am Mittwoch, 10. September 2014 21:03:36 UTC+2 schrieb Nils Bruin:
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 11:51:55 AM UTC-7, Martin R wrote:
I think that's what PermutationGroup and PermutationGroupElement do.
No:
sage: PermutationGroupElement((2,3,4)).parent()
Symmetric group of order 4! as a
I'm confirming what Dima and Martin just said: a lot of us need to see
permutations as words. For most of what I do, a permutation of size 4 is
just a word on the letter 1234. And in this case, the fact that it is
1-based or 0-based matters. It mostly matters in terms of printing and
input.
Hi,
If you're going to the JMM in San Antonio in January, and want to help
out with the Sage booth (e.g., setup, etc.), I can get you an
exhibitor badge, which gives you access to the exhibit hall at extra
times (and normal times).Let me know in the next few days.
I'll be at the booth a lot.
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:54:06 AM UTC-7, Nils Bruin wrote:
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 10:38:50 AM UTC-7, Nils Bruin wrote:
sage: Permutation([0,1,2])
In fact, one CAN see from this list whether the permutation is 0-based or
1-based, since every element from the domain
Hi William,
I will be at the Joint Meetings.
Anne
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 3:55:54 PM UTC-7, wstein wrote:
Hi,
If you're going to the JMM in San Antonio in January, and want to help
out with the Sage booth (e.g., setup, etc.), I can get you an
exhibitor badge, which gives you
32 matches
Mail list logo
