Many thanks for your comments! I am answering quickly below and
already started working on it.
2015-02-13 23:04 UTC+01:00, Andrey Novoseltsev :
> Works! I am a bit confused by keyword structure, that has dots, dashes, and
> underscores. Are there difficulties with spaces? And for dots, if they are
Works! I am a bit confused by keyword structure, that has dots, dashes, and
underscores. Are there difficulties with spaces? And for dots, if they are
supposed to have some hierarchy, I always liked lists on
http://sagemath.org/eval.html
(which apparently does not work anymore)
It would be nice t
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:08:49PM -0800, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> The link does not work, I am getting "Internal Server Error"
Thanks for the feedback.
Since there was not much registrations, we just made modifications to the
database structure (changes in the versionning system), so you conn
The link does not work, I am getting "Internal Server Error"
--
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 th
Double calling overhead is usually not considered acceptable.
The flexiblas paper only presents data for n>500, obviously overhead
doesn't matter then.
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 5:51:06 PM UTC+1, Alessandro Barbieri wrote:
>
> I'm not a developer and this is just an idea, but will be gre
On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 5:03:45 AM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> Does anybody have any GSoC projects to add to
>
> http://wiki.sagemath.org/GSoC/2015
I wanted to add this link to the wiki page:
http://trac.sagemath.org/query?status=needs_info&status=needs_work&status=new&milestone=sa
I'm not a developer and this is just an idea, but will be great if sage can
support multiple blas libraries using flexiblas.
http://www.mpi-magdeburg.mpg.de/projects/flexiblas
http://www.netlib.org/lapack/lawnspdf/lawn284.pdf
I tried this lib for compiling plasma and magma.
--
Informativa sull
Hey Vincent,
I am Manikandan Selvaganesh a final year student, doing my final
B.E(Computer Science and Engineering) in India. I have done some code
contributions to Fedora and Mozilla. I have learned "Game theory" paper in
my 6th semester. I am much interested in solving those problems.
Current
I saw it on Dima's webpage
http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/teaching/studentprojects/357.html
But i don't know if it was actually proposed officially.
Apperently there have been some movement on that aspect on sympy too:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSoC-2012-Application-Prateek-Papriwal:-Cylindri
> Are the bugs over all fields, e.g.? Maybe thats a way to narrow it down?
Another way to narrow down issues in 'factory' would be to upgrade to
recent Singular. There of course still bugs in,
but I did not catch them yet, or reported bugs were not tracked down to
'factory' ;-)
I'm working on
Am 11.02.2015 um 13:52 schrieb mmarco:
> IIRC there was an old proposal about implementing semialgebraic sets.
Hello Miguel, can you point me to this old proposal? I could not find it
in the list archive and on the wiki.
Robert
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog
Am 12.02.2015 um 15:08 schrieb Dima Pasechnik:
>> "Add support for systems of rational inequalities".
[...]
> There was a mentioning of a bigger thing - computing with semialgebraic
> sets, and then this topic would naturally become a part of such a project.
Yes, my univariate case would fit into
> Are the bugs over all fields, e.g.? Maybe thats a way to narrow it down?
Over different fields, not sure if over all (I'm not the author of factory
and not familiar with the code)
>Were you going to set the tickets to needs review after working more on it?
Workaround for now: set prioriry to
Are the bugs over all fields, e.g.? Maybe thats a way to narrow it down?
Were you going to set the tickets to needs review after working more on it?
Maybe we should add a boolean flag factorize(proof=None) and optionally
check the result depending on the base ring, isn't that much cheaper than
>Is there bugs where user gets wrong results (from factory)? I have seen
only polynomials
>giving error messages or halting randomly, but never wrong results
the (factory) stopgap http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17681
references a ticket (is a stopgap for)
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/1768
> Is there bugs where user gets wrong results?
Yes.
Am Freitag, 13. Februar 2015 12:09:03 UTC+1 schrieb Jori Mantysalo:
>
> On Fri, 13 Feb 2015, Jakob Kroeker wrote:
>
> > Factory is notoriusly buggy; it improved over time, but it is still
> > buggy. There are more than 20 bugs in factory whic
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015, Jakob Kroeker wrote:
Factory is notoriusly buggy; it improved over time, but it is still
buggy. There are more than 20 bugs in factory which are fixed in 4.0.1
but not in 3.1.7
Is there bugs where user gets wrong results? I have seen only polynomials
giving error message
> #17679 would need rebasing.
done
> Also the proposed stopgaps are probably a bit too broad... is the
testsuite passing with factorization disabled?
I'm new to sage; will the stopgaps break the testsuite? (checking...)
> Also the proposed stopgaps are probably a bit too broad
Factory is not
Well the testsuite passed for #17637 which is why it is already merged...
On Friday, February 13, 2015 at 11:04:01 AM UTC+1, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 1:35:34 PM UTC-8, Volker Braun wrote:
>>
>> Maybe review was the wrong word... decide on what to do.
>>
>> A
On Thursday, February 12, 2015 at 1:35:34 PM UTC-8, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Maybe review was the wrong word... decide on what to do.
>
> Also the proposed stopgaps are probably a bit too broad... is the
> testsuite passing with factorization disabled?
>
>I would say the same thing for http://
20 matches
Mail list logo
