I have no idea about trac's email setup, can you forward me the source code
of one of such emails? My guess is, that it doesn't properly sign the
email, etc.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop r
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 11:25:36 AM UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> The question is what precisely triggers the rebuild of cython files (==
> rebuild of all python extensions, I presume?)
>
file timestamps
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sag
Most of sage-location can safely be deleted. I did it once and nobody
reviewed it so I'm not that motivated to fix the merge conflicts that since
have accrued.
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19908
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:00:54 PM UTC+1, David Roe wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 1:04:57 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> Yes definitely. It worked very well for precisely this use case for a
> decade.
>
It might have worked for you but it certainly didn't work for all users,
there was a constant influx of random unfixable segfaults that you just
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 5:06:59 PM UTC, David Roe wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Dima Pasechnik > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:06:04 PM UTC, William wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Volker Braun
>>> wrote:
>>> > I've had people at work
as a workaround to speed it up it should be possible to copy the ccache
created while building the distributive.
The question is what precisely triggers the rebuild of cython files (==
rebuild of all python extensions, I presume?)
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 8:46:40 AM UTC, Volker Braun wro
Given two matrices G and H, the matrix K = [G, 0; 0, H] has determinant
det(K) = det(G) det(H)
So if you want this formula to remain true if one of the matrices is 0x0, then
you want the determinant of a 0x0 matrix to be 1.
From: sage-devel@googlegroups.com [sage
Hey all,
We ended up needing to compute the determinant of a 0x0 matrix in
#17030.Sage currently says the following:
sage: mat = matrix(ZZ, 0, 0)
sage: mat.det()
1
However, the code (and myself) was expecting this to be 0 as the sum in the
definition is vacuous.
Although, in a sense, the 0x
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:06:04 PM UTC, William wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Volker Braun
>> wrote:
>> > I've had people at workshops trying to compile Sage (never mind using
>> > binaries) and they were SOL beca
On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 4:31:04 AM UTC+1, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>We ended up needing to compute the determinant of a 0x0 matrix in
> #17030.Sage currently says the following:
>
> sage: mat = matrix(ZZ, 0, 0)
> sage: mat.det()
> 1
>
> However, the code (and myself) was exp
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>> Yes definitely. It worked very well for precisely this use case for a
>> decade.
>
>
> well, it was quite often a source of trouble (I can point to dozens of
> requests for help caused by LD_... paths issues), and then it has reached
> the
On Thursday, March 17, 2016, David Roe wrote:
> Here's a use case where the recent changes to relocatability are really
> annoying. I'd like 6 sage installs in an SMC project so that different
> groups at Sage Days 71 can work independently. So I tried building a copy
> from source and then cop
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 1:12:50 PM UTC, William wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Dima Pasechnik > wrote:
> >> Yes definitely. It worked very well for precisely this use case for a
> >> decade.
> >
> >
> > well, it was quite often a source of trouble (I can point to dozens of
13 matches
Mail list logo
