> On 8/09/2016, at 17:01, Grayson Jorgenson wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I also think the new answer is likely still correct. The output in the
> example is truncated to save space:
> C.resolution_of_singularities(extend=True) returns a tuple with the other
> elements giving maps between the patches a
Hi,
I also think the new answer is likely still correct. The output in the
example is truncated to save space:
C.resolution_of_singularities(extend=True) returns a tuple with the other
elements giving maps between the patches and back to the original curve. If
those maps make sense and the cur
On 08/09/16 11:21, mmarco wrote:
Both results are equivalent in this case (the given charts actually
differ only by a change of coordinates), but I am not sure why the
difference has appeared. I will try to have a look at it in the
following days (although don't have much time available lately).
Both results are equivalent in this case (the given charts actually differ
only by a change of coordinates), but I am not sure why the difference has
appeared. I will try to have a look at it in the following days (although
don't have much time available lately). Is it possible that Singular 4
Just posting with the code formatting to make it a bit more clear. Old
answer:
sage: set_verbose(-1)
sage: K. = QuadraticField(3)
sage: A. = AffineSpace(K, 2)
sage: C = A.curve(x^4 + 2*x^2 + a*y^3 + 1)
sage: C.resolution_of_singularities(
extend=True)[0] # long time (2 seconds)
(Affine Plane
Thierry wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 02:28:31PM +0200, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21421 we propose to add the Python
>> package "psutil" as standard package for Sage. The tarball is 308KB,
>> installed it is about 624KB. The use case is replacing
>
Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It seems we are left with only one failing doctest, which just looks
> like a different but potentially valid answer:
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17254#comment:364
>
> Does any one knows enough about resolution of singularities to validate
> the new a
[x] I agree, let's make psutil standard
--
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
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:28 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21421 we propose to add the Python
> package "psutil" as standard package for Sage. The tarball is 308KB,
> installed it is about 624KB. The use case is replacing
> src/sage/misc/memory_info.py
>
Hi all,
It seems we are left with only one failing doctest, which just looks like a
different but potentially valid answer:
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17254#comment:364
Does any one knows enough about resolution of singularities to validate the
new answer?
Best,
JP
--
You received this
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> [ x ] I agree, let's make psutil standard
I've used psutil in the past; it's a nice package.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivin
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 02:28:31PM +0200, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21421 we propose to add the Python
> package "psutil" as standard package for Sage. The tarball is 308KB,
> installed it is about 624KB. The use case is replacing
> src/sage/misc/memory
[X] I agree, let's make psutil standard
[ ] I don't want psutil in Sage
Best,
Travis
--
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...@go
leif wrote:
> Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>> [x] I agree, let's make psutil standard
>
> [x] I agree
>
> [x] Why is it that large?
[x] Use it in other places as well
(related to multiprocessing, such as
doctesting, docbuilding, building the
Sage libra
Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
> [x] I agree, let's make psutil standard
[x] I agree
[x] Why is it that large?
-leif
--
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
On 2016-09-07 14:48, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
Under the assumption that there is nothing more in memory_info.py than
in psutil
Well, psutil goes way beyond what memory_info.py provides. The only
logic that we would still need to keep from memory_info.py is these few
lines, which can easily be
Under the assumption that there is nothing more in memory_info.py than
in psutil
[ ] I agree, let's make psutil standard
Do you have an open ticket for testing psutil replacements?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscrib
[x] I agree, let's make psutil standard
--
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 em
Hello,
at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21421 we propose to add the Python
package "psutil" as standard package for Sage. The tarball is 308KB,
installed it is about 624KB. The use case is replacing
src/sage/misc/memory_info.py
From https://pypi.python.org/pypi/psutil
psutil is a cross-p
19 matches
Mail list logo
