[sage-devel] Re: Can't figure out how polynomial conversion works in the M2/Sage interface

2016-07-02 Thread saad khalid
Well, here's what i tried and it doesn't seem to work after I build sage again. I added this code to the to_sage() function, elif cls_str == "Divide": self_Div = self div_Numerator = macaulay2('numerator self_Div') div_Denominator = maca

[sage-devel] Re: Can't figure out how polynomial conversion works in the M2/Sage interface

2016-07-02 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 7:13:41 PM UTC+1, saad khalid wrote: > > Hey everyone: > > I was hoping some of you could provide some insight where my knowledge is > lacking. I'm trying to add to the M2/Sage interface by adding a conversion > for the M2 Divide class. Sage can already convert poly

[sage-devel] Can't figure out how polynomial conversion works in the M2/Sage interface

2016-07-02 Thread saad khalid
Hey everyone: I was hoping some of you could provide some insight where my knowledge is lacking. I'm trying to add to the M2/Sage interface by adding a conversion for the M2 Divide class. Sage can already convert polynomials, so my hope was to just have it treat the Divide class as two polynomi

[sage-devel] Re: When factorizing two polynomials: bug in gerepile, significant pointers lost

2016-07-02 Thread Ralf Stephan
Ah sorry, I confirm the observation on beta5. After both commands in the given order. -- 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...@google

[sage-devel] Re: When factorizing two polynomials: bug in gerepile, significant pointers lost

2016-07-02 Thread Ralf Stephan
I get this on beta5 for the first command: (100837962028354558549359124161681597*x^20 + 270917930127842441064021001407727686*x^ 19 - 15465362385090532027681012126697308*x^18 + 16986375609134831570968842775350*x^1 7 - 29476942979162692929636792384016*x^16 + 147550926306681751374468608357*x^15 +

[sage-devel] When factorizing two polynomials: bug in gerepile, significant pointers lost

2016-07-02 Thread Fabian Gundlach
Hello, I encountered the following error with Sage 7.2 (running Pari 2.8.0 - development git 61b65cc) on 64-bit Linux: sage: factor(10168294586031875795858081963666896068309279739028149015822994808470409*x^40 + 54637623902063579051764164063785862273611 227214908262321295448827189084*x^39 +

[sage-devel] Re: spkgs assumed for doctesting but not default installed

2016-07-02 Thread leif
Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: >> Except for the Sage library (and probably docbuilding, not sure), yes. >> If you explicitly use 'make -j1', then also the Sage library will be >> built sequentially, still using Python's multi-processing though, as >> does docbuilding. > > I've done `make distclean

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-edu] Viewpoint Article in Math Intelligencer on open texts

2016-07-02 Thread Karl-Dieter Crisman
> The paywall *is* discouraging, isn't it? > > My coauthor and I discussed the irony of publishing in a journal of this > type, of course, but it seemed to us that when you are in a minority and > you want to persuade, then you need to go to where the majority is. > > Yep. Thanks for wr

[sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

2016-07-02 Thread leif
leif wrote: > Ralf Stephan wrote: >> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 10:00:34 AM UTC+2, Ralf Stephan wrote: >> >> The giac and giacpy packages are now one year optional (#12375). Since >> pynac-0.6.6 (#20742) has optional support for giac, and uses it to >> fix a bug, >> as well as a

[sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

2016-07-02 Thread leif
Ralf Stephan wrote: > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 10:00:34 AM UTC+2, Ralf Stephan wrote: > > The giac and giacpy packages are now one year optional (#12375). Since > pynac-0.6.6 (#20742) has optional support for giac, and uses it to > fix a bug, > as well as a much faster GCD, I'

[sage-devel] Subfield generated by 0: segmentation fault

2016-07-02 Thread Jeroen Sijsling
Hello, In Sage 7.2 I get the following error: R. = PolynomialRing(QQ) pol_rep = [1, -12, 70, -264, 757, -1872, 4258, -8796, 15922, -24900, 33886, -40608, 43117, -40608, 33886, -24900, 15922, -8796, 4258, -1872, 757, -264, 70, -12, 1] K. = NumberField(R(pol_rep)) print K.subfield(K(1)) [...]

[sage-devel] Re: make giac/giacpy a standard package

2016-07-02 Thread mmarco
+1 -- 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 email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visi

Re: [sage-devel] make giac/giacpy a standard package

2016-07-02 Thread William Stein
On Friday, July 1, 2016, Ralf Stephan wrote: > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 10:00:34 AM UTC+2, Ralf Stephan wrote: >> >> The giac and giacpy packages are now one year optional (#12375). Since >> pynac-0.6.6 (#20742) has optional support for giac, and uses it to fix a >> bug, >> as well as a much

[sage-devel] Re: Trac workflow and needs_review

2016-07-02 Thread Volker Braun
No I haven't. Really it should be a trac plugin that prevents you from setting a ticket to positive review without filling out Author and Reviewer fields. A somewhat orthogonal issue is whether to record plain text names or user ids. The advantage of plain text is that anyone can be listed (),

[sage-devel] Re: [sage-edu] Viewpoint Article in Math Intelligencer on open texts

2016-07-02 Thread Volker Braun
Oh the irony... -- 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 email to sage-devel@googlegrou