On 2016-03-08 01:42, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
The "Special markup to influence (doc)tests" section of the developer's
guide claims that it is comprehensive. But I could not find any
explanation on the use of ellipsis "..."
The ellipsis is part of Python's doctest framework. In Python it's not
enable
I put up a branch on trac. I haven’t tested the upgrading capability (which
requires #19877), but the rest should work. Let me know if you have any
problems.
-Ivan
> On Feb 20, 2016, at 12:02 PM, Juan Luis Varona
> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks, Ivan!
>
> I will check the progress of the .app and
The "Special markup to influence (doc)tests" section of the developer's
guide claims that it is comprehensive. But I could not find any explanation
on the use of ellipsis "..." and on "# latex output" comment. I interpreted
the comment as requiring latex system installed on the system where
doc
On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-8, João Pedro Cruz wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I would like to output results with the following code:
> if MEGUA_PLATFORM=='sagews':
> fullpath = os.path.join(self.working_dir,
> self.unique_name()+'.tex')
> salvus.file(fullpath
Hello,
I would like to output results with the following code:
if MEGUA_PLATFORM=='sagews':
fullpath = os.path.join(self.working_dir,
self.unique_name()+'.tex')
salvus.file(fullpath)
else: #MEGUA_PLATFORM=='commandline'
fullpath = os.path.join(s
On 03/08/16 00:22, Erik Bray wrote:
Ah, I see what you're saying here. Though in that case I would think
one wouldn't want to rely on SAGE_LOCAL at all.
Instead it might be nice if each spkg came with a Python-based way to
check for it (those checks can and should be cached as well).
Indeed, s
Note that PARI should be able to compute such polynomials as well.
If not most of the needed code should be there.
(There is for sure for the j-invariant, not sure exactly what other
invariants are implemented right now.)
Have a look at what Hamish Ivey-Law added for modular and class polynomials
Or rather, just opened a ticket :/
On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 1:40:44 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
> Actually, I also wrote minimal bindings at that time:
> http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/11809
>
> On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 4:48:30 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>>
>> Old ticket:
>
Actually, I also wrote minimal bindings at that time:
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/11809
On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 4:48:30 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
> Old ticket:
> http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/11807
> There is no bindings there though.
> Maybe there is another ticket with bindi
On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 1:02:10 PM UTC+1, Bill Hart wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, 5 March 2016 18:11:20 UTC+1, William wrote:
>>
>> Relevant: Sage has a Weber class polynomial database that David Kohel
>> wrote:
>>
>> https://www.math.aau.at/user/cheuberg/sage/doc/6.10.beta3/en/reference/
On Saturday, 5 March 2016 18:11:20 UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> Relevant: Sage has a Weber class polynomial database that David Kohel
> wrote:
>
> https://www.math.aau.at/user/cheuberg/sage/doc/6.10.beta3/en/reference/databases/sage/databases/db_class_polynomials.html#sage.databases.db_class_p
Hi Ибкс,
That sounds interesting. Is your source code available somewhere for people
to look at?
What method did you use to compute Weber polynomials? Does it use a
guaranteed precision? How do you guarantee the output is correct?
Bill.
On Saturday, 5 March 2016 13:22:09 UTC+1, Ибкс Спбпу wro
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Francois Bissey
wrote:
> The problem is sage’s packaging system is integrated in sage itself at some
> level. Although there has been some decoupling lately.
>
> The problem for downstream like me is that I don’t and can’t rely on sage’s
> packaging system. Inside
The problem is sage’s packaging system is integrated in sage itself at some
level. Although there has been some decoupling lately.
The problem for downstream like me is that I don’t and can’t rely on sage’s
packaging system. Inside sage there is the possibility of using optional
component. Often
On 2016-03-07 10:59, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-03-07 09:36, Daniel Krenn wrote:
>>*** Warning: can't expand ~.
>
> Does the path contain "~"?
Repository binary-pkg was at
/local/dakrenn/sage/binary-pkg
The package was extracted to
/local/dakrenn/sage/7.1.beta6
Thus, no, the p
Sorry, apparently I am late to the patch by few minutes thanks for the
pointers though, I'll keep surfing trac for related work in progress.
As for gcc on my machine being reinstalled by sage I guess I do have an old
version: 4.7
Thanks
S.
* Jeroen Demeyer [2016-03-04 11:44:09]:
> On 2016-0
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 8:14 PM, Francois Bissey
wrote:
> I will hopefully have a bit of forum at sage days 77. I’ll probably want to
> concentrate on `is_package_installed` considered harmful.
Maybe I'm premature in asking if this is something you want to save
for SD77, but could you expand on th
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 3:01 PM, kcrisman wrote:
>>
>>
>> The problem, as I see it, is that Sage has built up over the years its
>> own ad-hoc packaging system. This is actually really cool, because
>> it's what's allowed Sage to be installable on a wide range of
>> platforms! I think this happen
On 2016-03-07 09:36, Daniel Krenn wrote:
*** Warning: can't expand ~.
Does the path contain "~"?
--
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-d
On 2016-03-07 10:44, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> does
> $ sage -gp
> work on this binary?
? 1+1
%1 = 2
Yes, the basic command above works. But maybe I would have to call
something more advanced.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To un
does
$ sage -gp
work on this binary?
(googling " *** Warning: can't expand ~." will show an old sage-devel
post and a closed PARI/GP related ticket...)
On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 8:36:08 AM UTC, Daniel Krenn wrote:
>
> I've used https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg to create a package
>
On 7 March 2016 at 08:36, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> I've used https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg to create a package
> sage-7.1.beta6-Ubuntu_14.04-x86_64.tar.bz2
> Then I've extracted it to some location; relocating (once) seem to have
> worked, but with the following issues (with make ptestlong
I've used https://github.com/sagemath/binary-pkg to create a package
sage-7.1.beta6-Ubuntu_14.04-x86_64.tar.bz2
Then I've extracted it to some location; relocating (once) seem to have
worked, but with the following issues (with make ptestlong):
1a) Before running the tests, all the cythonized fi
23 matches
Mail list logo
