Feature or bug?
sage: QQ(7) // QQ(2)
7/2
I would expect
sage: QQ(7) // QQ(2)
3
--
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
As far as I know we do not have any specifications for //. In euclidean
ring it would be natural for it to be the quotient. But in other situations?
1. Should we always have
a == a//b + a%b
2. Should // always be internal?
Vincent
On 19/01/16 08:28, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
Feature or bug?
On 2016-01-19 13:31, John Cremona wrote:
This would only make sense if ZZ was the only ring of which QQ was the
field of fractions. Similarly with rational function fields, in my
opinion.
Well, you are thinking too mathematical. Of course, defining a//b = a/b
makes any field into a Euclidean
Presumably nobody has a problem with
sage: R. = QQ[]
sage: (3*x^2+1) // (2*x)
3/2*x
and it would be rather strange if the binary operations on the scalars
behave different in QQ vs degree-0-part(QQ[x]). Whereas it shouldn't come
as too much of a surprise that division-related operations
On 2016-01-19 12:49, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
1. Should we always have
a == a//b + a%b
I guess you mean
a == (a//b)*b + a%b
Buy yes, this invariant is very important and should always be satisfied.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
That worked, fantastic, thanks so much. -AH
On Saturday, January 16, 2016 at 12:14:56 PM UTC-5, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Are you switching between Sage-6 and Sage-7 based branches? Then you need
> to recompile everything ("make distclean && make")
>
>
> On Saturday, January 16, 2016 at 5:53:45 PM
On 19/01/16 09:31, John Cremona wrote:
On 19 January 2016 at 11:49, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
As far as I know we do not have any specifications for //. In euclidean ring
it would be natural for it to be the quotient. But in other situations?
1. Should we always have
Hi, I got the following both on my machine as on the sage cloud:
~/sage-git$ git trac config --user stumpc5 --pass ''
Saved trac username.
Saved trac password.
Trac xmlrpc URL:
http://trac.sagemath.org/xmlrpc (anonymous)
http://trac.sagemath.org/login/xmlrpc (authenticated)
realm
On 19 January 2016 at 12:37, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19/01/16 09:31, John Cremona wrote:
>>
>> On 19 January 2016 at 11:49, Vincent Delecroix
>> <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> As far as I know we do not have any specifications for //. In euclidean
>>>
What did it download to /tmp/tmpBtMBUh?
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 1:18:37 PM UTC, Christian Stump wrote:
>
> Hi, I got the following both on my machine as on the sage cloud:
>
> ~/sage-git$ git trac config --user stumpc5 --pass ''
> Saved trac username.
> Saved trac password.
> Trac
I just added better error message for that in git-trac, if you update that
then it'll show you which line is wrong.
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 2:07:31 PM UTC, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> I think you have an invalid ssh key added to trac, can you double-check?
>
>
> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016
On 19 January 2016 at 11:49, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I know we do not have any specifications for //. In euclidean ring
> it would be natural for it to be the quotient. But in other situations?
>
> 1. Should we always have
>
> a == a//b + a%b
>
> 2.
I think you have an invalid ssh key added to trac, can you double-check?
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 2:00:49 PM UTC, Christian Stump wrote:
>
> > What did it download to /tmp/tmpBtMBUh?
>
> The file doesn't appear to exist. Is the command "git trac config
> --user YourName --pass 'pwd' "
The behaviour for ZZ--QQ--RR decided in that other thread are taking
quotients over the sub-ring ZZ. More specifically:
if a,b are in ZZ, QQ or RR then it was decided that a % b should
implicitly satisfy:
a == (a//b) * b + a%b
and a//b in ZZ and a%b has norm smaller than b (norm as in
> What did it download to /tmp/tmpBtMBUh?
The file doesn't appear to exist. Is the command "git trac config
--user YourName --pass 'pwd' " only not working for me?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
Dear Developers,
I am a newbie and would like to get started.
I am in my sophomore year at college and i know c,c++,python,html,css and
javascript.
I would be highly grateful if i could get some assistance with this.
Thanking you.
Regards,
Siddhartha
--
You received this message because you
Whats the error with the updated git-trac script?
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 3:12:55 PM UTC, Christian Stump wrote:
>
> > You can have multiple ssh keys (I have serveral); But they have to be
> > separated by newlines and not pasted end-to-end in a single line.
>
> Hm, I also have them
> Whats the error with the updated git-trac script?
you find the error with the updated script at the end. I can now
reproduce and solve the error:
--> if I 1. go to Preferences -> SSH keys, 2. add blank lines between
the different keys, 3. press "save changes", I get the below error
message
> I think you have an invalid ssh key added to trac, can you double-check?
Okay, it appears that I can only paste a *single* ssh key into the
field in the trac preferences. Even though it says that I can have
multiple, one per line.
I now have three there, and pasting any single of them makes it
You can have multiple ssh keys (I have serveral); But they have to be
separated by newlines and not pasted end-to-end in a single line.
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 2:39:00 PM UTC, Christian Stump wrote:
>
> > I think you have an invalid ssh key added to trac, can you double-check?
>
>
How does it work with Sage's application to GSoC and what are the
relevant deadlines? Also, in what period should the project be conducted?
I have an idea for a project I would like to mentor, but I have to be
sure that I'm available in the period.
Best,
Johan
Samuel Lelièvre writes:
> Mentors
well the empty string is not a valid key; I'll change the script to skip
over them.
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 3:32:46 PM UTC, Christian Stump wrote:
>
> > Whats the error with the updated git-trac script?
>
> you find the error with the updated script at the end. I can now
> reproduce
> well the empty string is not a valid key; I'll change the script to skip over
> them.
I agree. But the empty lines seem to be deleted automatically on the
preferences page (I only copy-paste it forward to an editor and then
back to the website, without any deletion of empty line). I only used
23 matches
Mail list logo
