Re: [sage-devel] Re: SageNB, publishing and error 500

2017-08-20 Thread Jori Mäntysalo
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017, kcrisman wrote: BuildError: Could not build url for endpoint 'worksheet_publish' with values ['id', 'username']. Did you mean 'worksheet.worksheet_publish' instead? Hmm.  Probably related: https://ask.sagemath.org/question/38486/build-error-when-uploading

Re: [sage-devel] Bug in modp sparse matrix multiply

2017-08-20 Thread Vincent Delecroix
Dear Dan, Thanks for the report! This is indeed a bug. If you want to go further and fix the bug yourself, the procedure is described here http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/ Otherwise I will open the relevant ticket. Vincent On 20/08/2017 19:59, Daniel Roche wrote: Hi sagers, Firs

[sage-devel] Bug in modp sparse matrix multiply

2017-08-20 Thread Daniel Roche
Hi sagers, First let me say thanks for the great piece of software that is sage. You all do a tremendous job and maybe don't get thanked enough. There appears to be a bug in sparse matrix multiplication over small finite fields: sage: p = next_prime(2**15); p 32771 sage: M = Matrix(GF(p), 1,3,

Re: [sage-devel] Senseless leading_ methods introduced on all matrices

2017-08-20 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 6:02:32 PM UTC+1, John Cremona wrote: > > On 20 August 2017 at 17:47, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde > wrote: > > > > Vincent Delecroix writes: > > > >> If the basis of a "Finite dimensional module with basis" is always > assumed to be > >> ordered, then such method m

Re: [sage-devel] Graph theory/Linear Programming bug

2017-08-20 Thread Dima Pasechnik
On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 5:27:55 PM UTC+1, fidelbc wrote: > > Just created the ticket [1]. Not reported to GLPK, do you recommend to do > so? > no, GLPK (with default parameters) is certainly not guilty here. It's just a precision loss that is not avoidable while computing with floating p

Re: [sage-devel] Senseless leading_ methods introduced on all matrices

2017-08-20 Thread John Cremona
On 20 August 2017 at 17:47, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > > Vincent Delecroix writes: > >> If the basis of a "Finite dimensional module with basis" is always assumed >> to be >> ordered, then such method make sense. However, the terminology is quite >> strange. >> I see 1+1/2 ambiguities for m

Re: [sage-devel] Senseless leading_ methods introduced on all matrices

2017-08-20 Thread Johan S. H. Rosenkilde
Vincent Delecroix writes: > If the basis of a "Finite dimensional module with basis" is always assumed to > be > ordered, then such method make sense. However, the terminology is quite > strange. > I see 1+1/2 ambiguities for matrices over polynomial ring such as Mat(ZZ[X], > 3). > > 1) leadin

Re: [sage-devel] Graph theory/Linear Programming bug

2017-08-20 Thread fidelbc
Just created the ticket [1]. Not reported to GLPK, do you recommend to do so? Wasn't sure who to CC, please edit the ticket if you have any suggestions. [1]: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23658#ticket On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 6:58:19 AM UTC-4, vdelecroix wrote: > > Might be due to round

Re: [sage-devel] Graph theory/Linear Programming bug

2017-08-20 Thread Dima Pasechnik
Certainly, a procedure that carelessly adds inequalities to an LP formulation solved by a solver working with a machine precision is going to exhibit this sort of behaviour on a sufficiently bad example. Thus, yes, it should be fixed by setting the default solver to be PPK. -- You received thi

Re: [sage-devel] Graph theory/Linear Programming bug

2017-08-20 Thread Vincent Delecroix
Might be due to roundoff issue (?). PPL does exact solving (using rationals from GMP) while GLPK works with floating point numbers. Though, on such small instance it looks suspicious that floating point are to blame (especially if CBC/Coin works fine). Is there a Sage ticket open? Was it report

Re: [sage-devel] Senseless leading_ methods introduced on all matrices

2017-08-20 Thread Vincent Delecroix
If the basis of a "Finite dimensional module with basis" is always assumed to be ordered, then such method make sense. However, the terminology is quite strange. I see 1+1/2 ambiguities for matrices over polynomial ring such as Mat(ZZ[X], 3). 1) leading_coefficient might be a termwise applicat

[sage-devel] Re: Senseless leading_ methods introduced on all matrices

2017-08-20 Thread Johan S. H. Rosenkilde
Travis Scrimshaw writes: >> While it is arguably too rigid to say that this is "senseless" (as I >> wrote in the subject), > > You already did that, and because you started off calling them "senseless," > you have polluted this issue with your heavily loaded question. That is > unfair and demea

[sage-devel] Re: nbconvert new dependencies...

2017-08-20 Thread Volker Braun
Afaik nbconvert always dependend on pandoc for certain types of output (like PDF). Just like LaTeX (which is also a dependency), users have to have typesetting tools installed. On Sunday, August 20, 2017 at 9:51:37 AM UTC+2, François Bissey wrote: > > Hi all, > > I am bit concerned by the new

[sage-devel] nbconvert new dependencies...

2017-08-20 Thread François Bissey
Hi all, I am bit concerned by the new version of nbconvert released upstream (5.2.1). Sage currently uses 4.2.0 as a standard package. nbconvert now uses pandoc which is an haskell package. That’s what my upgrade path for nbconvert, from zero haskell on the system, looks like in Gentoo: [ebuild N