Re: [sage-devel] Online Sage Days

On 9 September 2017 at 10:04, David Roe wrote: > Hi everyone, > I'd like to organize some online Sage Days, where people gather on > zulip.sagemath.org and work on Sage together. The two things to be > decided are > Sounds good. 1. What topics should we focus on? > 2. What days/times work for

Re: [sage-devel] Implementation plan : inclusion of OpenSSL

On 25 October 2017 at 16:38, Emmanuel Charpentier < emanuel.charpent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Proposal for implementation of OpenSSL inclusion in Sage. > > The inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage has been decided > > after a long and fru

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 24 October 2017 at 15:51, Emmanuel Charpentier < emanuel.charpent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Final tally > > Yes, we should fully support OpenSSL now, and clarify the licensing issue > : 9 unambiguous votes : > > > > No, we should wait until OpenSSL finishes fixing their license situation > fo

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 18 October 2017 at 14:13, Erik Bray wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:52 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave > Note: We're not talking about adding *any* OpenSSL code to SageMath. > Sage would never be distributed with code from OpenSSL. We're only > talking about providing a means to do

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 18 Oct 2017 00:39, "William Stein" wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 4:35 PM Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) < drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote: >> There are a lot of number theorists using Sagemath. Could one or more consider implementing the f

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 17 Oct 2017 23:56, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 17, 2017 at 10:52:47 PM UTC+1, Nicolas M. Thiéry wrote: >> >> > The problem is that we cannot, as rightfully pointed here by Michael, provide a tarball with OpenSSL source, as this > would be an outright copyright violation. Th

Re: [sage-devel] EU Copyright reform threatens open source

On 2 October 2017 at 09:38, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > Dear Sage developers, > > Summary: the EU is looking to pass a new copyright act that would > require sharing platforms to filter for copyright infringements. For > software sharing platforms like GitHub, GitLab, ... this is very > pr

Re: [sage-devel] EU Copyright reform threatens open source

On 2 October 2017 at 09:38, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > Dear Sage developers, > > Summary: the EU is looking to pass a new copyright act that would > require sharing platforms to filter for copyright infringements. For > software sharing platforms like GitHub, GitLab, ... this is very > pr

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Including 64-bit-only code in Sage

On 20 September 2017 at 07:58, Volker Braun wrote: > IMHO its a code smell if your code doesn't work on 32-bit platforms. > Remember, almost all 32 bit platforms are perfectly capable of working with > 64-bit integers (just not as fast). But your code must be *correct* (e.g. > use uint64_t), and

Re: [sage-devel] Does anyone use SAGE64?

On 4 September 2017 at 18:34, Erik Bray wrote: > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote: > +1 I think if this functionality is needed for Solaris (or any other > platform) it should be moved into configure.ac, and the explicit > environment variables done away with. > > But th

Re: [sage-devel] Does anyone use SAGE64?

On 2 September 2017 at 21:59, John H Palmieri wrote: > > I don't know if Sage works on Solaris right now, but if it does, does it > build gcc (as it does on OS X), or does it use a preexisting compiler? > I would be surprised if Sage did build on Solaris now, as I would be extreamly surprised if

Re: [sage-devel] Does anyone use SAGE64?

On 2 September 2017 at 01:41, John H Palmieri wrote: > > > Hi Dave, > > Can you clarify? You say that the are necessary on Solaris, but is that > recent information? It is possible that newer versions of Sage and/or > Solaris might make SAGE64 unnecessary. > > Regards, > John > Hi John, https

Re: [sage-devel] Does anyone use SAGE64?

On 2 Sep 2017 01:41, "John H Palmieri" wrote: > Hi Dave, > > Can you clarify? You say that the are necessary on Solaris, but is that recent information? It is possible that newer versions of Sage and/or Solaris might make SAGE64 unnecessary. > > Regards, > John Hi John, I will look into this.

Re: [sage-devel] Does anyone use SAGE64?

On 1 Sep 2017 23:54, "François Bissey" wrote: > > > > On 2/09/2017, at 10:47, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) < drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > On 1 Sep 2017 23:21, "John H Palmieri" wrote: > > > >

Re: [sage-devel] Does anyone use SAGE64?

On 1 Sep 2017 23:21, "John H Palmieri" wrote: > > Does anyone use the environment variables SAGE64 of CFLAG64? At https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23733, it is suggested that they be deprecated and then removed. Any comments? > > -- > John They are necessary if one attempts to build a 64 bit vers

Re: [sage-devel] Calculation Error

On 26 August 2017 at 01:40, David Roe wrote: > This is not a bug. If you look at the documentation for Integer.__pow__, > you'll see "For consistency with Python and MPFR, 0^0 is defined to be 1 in > Sage." > David > I'm not a mathematician, but believe 0^0 is undefined. Sagemath being consiste

Re: [sage-packaging] Re: [sage-devel] Upgrade PARI to git master

On 27 July 2017 at 10:01, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > On 2017-07-26 00:46, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote: > >> Would it be worth creating a fork of PARI >> > > What *exactly* do you mean with that? > > I feel like "fork" is just a word and you

Re: [sage-devel] Upgrade PARI to git master

On 25 Jul 2017 21:16, "Jeroen Demeyer" wrote: > > Hello sage-devel and sage-packaging, > > I propose to upgrade the PARI package to the git master version instead of the current released version. > > > A second motivation is that stable releases of PARI are very slow. The most recent stable PARI r

[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for main configure script to give package names for Latex.

On 6 September 2016 at 13:45, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > Hi David, > > > On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 9:08:25 AM UTC, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby > Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> I'm trying to migrate away from Solaris to Linux, given the takeover by >> O

[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for main configure script to give package names for Latex.

On Tuesday, 6 September 2016, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > Hi David, > > On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 9:08:25 AM UTC, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby > Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> I'm trying to migrate away from Solaris to Linux, given the takeover by >> Oracle. I d

[sage-devel] Suggestion for main configure script to give package names for Latex.

I'm trying to migrate away from Solaris to Linux, given the takeover by Oracle. I decided to install the latest Debian (8.5 == Jessie) , and Sage. I have not succeeded yet, but some of the issues seem to be ones where the installation could be made easier for popular linux distributions. First con

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 3 October 2015 at 16:38, rjf wrote: > > > > Most software developers seeking funding need a "killer app". I don't > know that Mathematica has one -- but maybe it is STEM education, > since that's the major way of selling lots of systems. There were > forays into financial software, engineeri

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 30 Sep 2015 21:51, "Bill Hart" wrote: > > I don't see why would you make people use Sage for that, just so you can get the Sage usage figures up, instead of writing that as a simple Python package. > But if Sage could do a lot of the things related to this, which RF engineers can do with the M

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 30 Sep 2015 21:51, "Bill Hart" wrote: > > I don't see why would you make people use Sage for that, just so you can get the Sage usage figures up, instead of writing that as a simple Python package. > But if Sage could do a lot of the things related to this, which RF engineers can do with the M

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 30 September 2015 at 20:44, Bill Hart wrote: > > It's extremely unlikely we'll get someone wanting to move to the EU from > overseas for a position only guaranteed for one year. We are at least being > realistic about it. > > Bill. > Certainly many engineers would do it. A contract post for

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 30 September 2015 at 18:05, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: > > It is usually good to build on strong points. So, what are best areas in > Sage? Where it now is The Software(tm) to use? > > And how could we expand those to some near area? > I'm not convinced that is true - in fact, I would go as far as

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 30 September 2015 at 10:07, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) < drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote: > > > O * HP 4284A precision frequency reference > Oops, the 4284A is a precision LCR meter, not a frequency reference. That instrument is obsolete http://www.

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 28 Sep 2015 18:25, "Francesco Biscani" wrote: > I have always felt a tad confused and mislead by this statement. > > As someone who has interacted over the years with physicists and engineers using daily Mathematica, Maple and Matlab, I see very little overlap between their typical use of thes

Re: [sage-devel] What can we assume about our C compiler

On 21 Sep 2015 13:58, "Thierry Dumont" wrote: > > Le 21/09/2015 14:16, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : > > On 2015-09-21 13:47, Nathann Cohen wrote: > >> Hello everybody, > >> > >> What can we assume on our C compiler? Is it always gcc? > > > Did anybody tried ICC ? I can do it, for fun... For what it

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 13 Sep 2015 21:49, "William Stein" wrote: >> Agreed, the AIX interested from someone at IBM did go anywhere. But that does not mean that an approach to other hardware/software vendors would fail. If funding has dried up from research grants, perhaps another approach is needed. > I won't be pur

Re: [sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

On 13 September 2015 at 18:31, William Stein wrote: > > > On Sunday, September 13, 2015, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) < > drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote: > >> A ticket I opened years ago about a problem on AIX, got closed recently. >> It got m

[sage-devel] Mobile Friendly web sites - SageMath is not one of them.

I recently updated a web site for my local amateur radio club, to make it "mobile friendly", as defined by Google. One advantage of that is it gets higher search ranking by Google when a user is using a mobile device than a site would otherwise get, See https://www.google.co.uk/webmasters/tools/m

[sage-devel] Sources of funding - perhaps computer manufacturers?

A ticket I opened years ago about a problem on AIX, got closed recently. It got me thinking about something whose usefulness could well extend beyond one issue building Sage on AIX. I gather William is having problems getting funding from NSF and similar places. I wonder if it's time to look at t

Re: [sage-devel] Why am I getting tons of old sage-trac emails?

On 7 September 2015 at 06:12, David Roe wrote: > Frédéric Chapoton was removing tab characters from the description > field on lots of old tickets. He has since stopped, upon request. > There's a recent thread about an alternate solution to the problem he > was trying to solve. > David > Thank

[sage-devel] Why am I getting tons of old sage-trac emails?

My inbox seems to be filling up with tons of emails about trac tickets I opened years ago and were fixed years ago. The following is an example of the probably 50-100 tickrts I have been involved with. http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/9025 was opened 5 years ago, fixed and merged 5 years ago, but

[sage-devel] Pretty confusing problem stoping Sage 6.9.beta5 even try to build on OpenSolaris - it used to build fine

Sage used to build fine on OpenSolaris - in fact, I used to host a buildbot, which I could still do, although having a dynamic IP, it is a bit more tricky than when I had a static one. But now it seems to be failing very early on in the process, complaining that "-j12" is an invalid option to "con

[sage-devel] It's confusing including both "configure" and "Makefile" in source.

Most unix programs distributed in source code form have a configure script generated from configure.ac, but do **not** include a Makefile. The Makefile is generated by the configurae script, to suite the configuration of the platform it is running on. Other programs don't have a configure script

Re: [sage-devel] Announcing $0M in new funding for the SageMathCloud over the next 3 years

On 8 July 2015 18:17, "William Stein" wrote: > > I now have absolutely no NSF funding at all to support any > Sage-related (or other) activities anymore. This is the third > Sage-related NSF grant proposal I've been on that was rejected in a > row. > > Anyway, for me personally and SageMathCloud

Re: (off topic) Re: [sage-devel] The future of polybori

On 11 Jun 2015 20:10, "William Stein" wrote: > > It's officially called "The Wolfram Language" [1] beating out [2] many It would never surprise me is it was renamed to the Stephen Wolfram Language. Dave. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Extremely broad bug in Sage Integral Computations

Dr. David Kirkby Ph.D CEng MIET Kirkby Microwave Ltd Registered office: Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Essex, CM3 6DT, UK. Registered in England and Wales, company number 08914892. http://www.kirkbymicrowave.co.uk/ Tel: 07910 441670 / +44 7910 441670 (0900 to 2100 GMT only please) On 4 J

[sage-devel] Build problem of zeromq-4.0.5 on 32-bit SPARC processor running Solaris.

After my recent failure to build Sage with the gcc on my system (4.5.0), I tried to use Sage's built in gcc (4.9.2), which worked until it tried to build the package zeromq-4.0.5, which I think is a standard package added since I last built Sage on Solaris. I believe this is an upstream bug, and h

Re: [sage-devel] Sage 6.7 fails to build on Solaris SPARC - libfplll-4.0.4 problem with "isfinite"

On 25 May 2015 00:05, "François Bissey" wrote: > > On 05/25/15 10:03, François Bissey wrote: >> >> What version of gcc are you using? >> > > I see 4.5.0. I don't really know if it is because it is > too old I will try a build tomorrow letting Sage build the included and later gcc. Hopefully that

Re: [sage-devel] Sage 6.7 fails to build on Solaris SPARC - libfplll-4.0.4 problem with "isfinite"

On 24 May 2015 22:04, "François Bissey" wrote: > > Painful memory from when I tried to compile octave with IBM xlC > compiler. Before c++11 it is a gnu extension. You probably got > a compiler that decided to be stricter. > > Francois I am using gcc though - not the Oracle compiler which I am sur

[sage-devel] Sage 6.7 fails to build on Solaris SPARC - libfplll-4.0.4 problem with "isfinite"

Sage used to build fine on 32-bit SPARC, and pass all doctests, but something is stopping it building now. I think I have seen this "isfinite" issue before in Sage on Solaris. I'm not sure what package it was in, but I know the problem was fixed. Hopefully it wont take too much effort to get this w

Re: [sage-devel] hosting the sage cell server

On 14 Apr 2015 22:50, "William Stein" wrote: > > Hi Sage Developers, > > Is there anybody who would be willing to host the Sage cell server? > http://sagecell.sagemath.org/ I'm unable to do this, but I rather suspect that you would have zero or very few offers if the cloud software was closed sou

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Is Sage living in a state of emergency ?

On 18 May 2015 17:29, "William Stein" wrote: > It's also worth keeping in mind that people may offer to host services > at their university, unaware that what they are doing might > potentially violate rules. At least, I know from personal experience > that this could be an issue.. It's interes

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Deprecate or just remove

On 14 Apr 2015 18:26, "Niles Johnson" wrote: > > another 2c: There is also the option of deprecating, but for less than the somewhat arbitrary 1 year. Although I would agree a year is somewhat arbitrary, a couple of things are worth bearing in mind about the year. 1) If a lecturer uses Sage in

Re: [sage-devel] Mathematica interface

On 22 December 2014 at 00:43, Robert Jacobson wrote: > Hi. I have yet to contribute code to sage, but I think I've found something > easy enough for me to start with. I'd like to talk about how to proceed. > > I found ticket #13892 and the apparent duplicate ticket #15318 which > indicate that the

Re: [sage-devel] Mathematica interface

On 23 December 2014 at 00:55, Robert Jacobson wrote: > > > On Sunday, 21 December 2014 23:56:24 UTC-5, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby > Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> There is an open source command line interface to Mathematica. IIRC it >> uses curses so one can reca

Re: [sage-devel] Mathematica interface

On 23 Dec 2014 00:55, "Robert Jacobson" wrote: > > On Sunday, 21 December 2014 23:56:24 UTC-5, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> There is an open source command line interface to Mathematica. >> Dave > > > When I searched for one las

Re: [sage-devel] Mathematica interface

On 22 Dec 2014 00:43, "Robert Jacobson" wrote: > > Hi. I have yet to contribute code to sage, but I think I've found something easy enough for me to start with. I'd like to talk about how to proceed. > > I found ticket #13892 and the apparent duplicate ticket #15318 which indicate that the Mathema

Re: [sage-devel] SageMathCloud now open source

On 11 Dec 2014 17:46, "William Stein" wrote: > > Hi, > > SageMathCloud is now completely open source. Great. > Question: Why is SMC open source? > > Answer: Two of the four NSF grants that very substantially supported > SMC development had explicit open source requirements. > > > -- William So

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Maple versus Mathematica

On 1 Dec 2014 05:48, "William Stein" wrote: > Mathematica has weak coverage across much of mathematics related to > algebraic geometry, arithmetic geometry, number theory and group > theory. > In particular, as a specialist in computational number theory, I find > the functionality in mathematica

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Maple versus Mathematica

On 27 Nov 2014 20:51, "maldun" wrote: > I personally a comparison of sage with the other Systems is quite hard, since all of the other 4Ms concentrate more or less > on particular fields of mathematic (e.g. Matlab focus on numerics, Mathematica more on Calculus etc.) > Sage is far from perfect bu

[sage-devel] The "code of conduct" is getting out of hand - please stop for 2 weeks.

Discussions on this are not going in a positive direction. The tone of the discussions is far worst than anything I have seen on here in a long time. I think it would be best if everyone stopped discussing it for a couple of weeks, and revisited it later (I propose Monday the 15th December). Mayb

[sage-devel] IMHO having "sage-abuse" publicly readable is a bad idea

I voted against the code of conduct, as I did not feel it was well thought out. Nothing has changed my mind about that - in fact the discussions just seem to reinforce my view. But that aside, I respect the decision of a majority. I always felt it was bad to have Sage developers making decisions b

Re: [sage-devel] VOTE: code of conduct - ends Monday at midnight, PST.

[x] No -- do not adopt the code of conduct stated below David Kirkby -- 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 p

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

On 21 Nov 2014 22:22, "Dima Pasechnik" wrote: > I'd say it's OK to have such a code, but it's not really OK to actively enforce > it. Such an active enforcement would only be counterproductive, if not > outright impossible. > > Dima Is there any point in having something that is not enforced? Th

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

On 22 Nov 2014 18:38, "William Stein" wrote: > I will start a new thread on sage-devel with a clear title "VOTE: code > of conduct", copy of the proposed code, and [ ] Yes/ [ ] No option, I hope that your vote states how the code of conduct will be administered, how readers of sage-abuse will be

Re: [sage-devel] Maple versus Mathematica

On 18 Nov 2014 22:37, "Stefan" wrote: > > I don't know if I simply lack the appropriate Mathematica knowledge, but years ago, when I implemented matroids > lM = Map[If[# == 0, 0, 1] &, M[[2]][[#[[2]] & /@ M[[3]], #[[2]] & /@ M[[4, {2}]; I am no expert on Mathematica, but Mathematica code does

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Code of Conduct

On 18 Nov 2014 18:36, "William Stein" wrote: > the top 12 all time list of contributors to Sage, in order, are: > > - William Stein > - Mike Hansen > - Volker Braun > - Jereon Demeyer > - Nathann Cohen > - Robert Bradshaw > - Robert Miller > - Simon King > - John Palmieri > -

Re: [sage-devel] Code of Conduct

On 15 November 2014 16:44, Anne Schilling wrote: >> > Code of Conduct > > Thanks for the links to the guidelines. It is interesting to see how other > communities handle this. > Dave's question was how situations will be handled when a violation occurs or > that are reported. > Does your com

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 14 November 2014 09:22, Bruno Grenet wrote: > 2014-11-14 10:05 GMT+01:00 rjf : >> >> My point here is that an unenlightened and obscure part of a problem >> with one computer program has (I think mistakenly) been elevated to >> a discussion of mathematics, open source, computer program reliabi

Re: [sage-devel] Code of Conduct

On 13 November 2014 18:48, Volker Braun wrote: > and welcome everyone to > vote on it. > > > Code of Conduct > --- > If you believe someone is violating the code of conduct, we ask that you > report it by emailing sage-ab...@googlegroups.com. The group administrators > will consider t

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 13 Nov 2014 11:27, "Jeroen Demeyer" wrote: > > On 2014-11-13 12:19, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> di erent(sic) >> con dent(sic) > > I think these are font issues with your PDF reader. You are missing the glyphs for the ligatures

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

LOn 13 Nov 2014 11:19, "Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd)" < drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote: > 4) It might be worth briefly stating that if (hypothetically) such a > bug was found in Sage, rather than just report the bug, the trio could > have inspected Sage,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 12 November 2014 20:18, Ursula Whitcher wrote: > On 11/11/2014 3:41 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote: > >> If I am honest, I am not that convinced it is a good follow up comment, > > > OK, I won't put your name on it ;) You can if I ultimately fee

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 13 November 2014 11:19, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote: > You need to be a particularly confident use to report a bug in a trac > ticket. I have reported bugs in software I know very little about, but > enough to know there is a bug. Of course I mean you do NOT hav

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 12 November 2014 20:35, Ursula Whitcher wrote: > Article at > > http://people.uwec.edu/whitchua/notes/sagebugprocess.pdf > > has been updated based on feedback. > > UAW A bit more feedback - from a non-mathematician. 1) It would be better if rather than over-writing an old version of your

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 10 Nov 2014 23:08, "Ursula Whitcher" wrote: > > On 11/5/2014 8:24 AM, Willia . s J. _ .m Stein wrote: > >> * By "we write up" above, I mean you write up something very, very >> rough, post it here, and get feedback. > > > Done! > > http://people.uwec.edu/whitchua/notes/sagebugprocess.pdf > > I

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 4 Nov 2014 19:16, "rjf" >> Perhaps the mathematical community needs to have an open-access database of bug reports for commercial software. A discussion of the usefulness, legality, practicality, commercial benefits etc. of such a database could be interesting. > think it's > not the "mathema

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 3 Nov 2014 22:05, "William Stein" wrote: > I usually ignore RJF, but in this I just want to encourage everybody > else to also ignore him too... regarding his discouragement about > everything, especially Ursula's excellent suggestion. I'm sure the > AMS would be very interesting in publishi

Re: [sage-devel] "Can We Trust Computer Algebra Systems?"

On 29 Oct 2014 14:54, "Jakob Kroeker" wrote: > In fact, in particular cases active testing was already done by some Sage developers, > which (I do not know this) probably were not explicitly paid for that task. I have certainly fed random inputs to sage and found some that would crash it. At lea

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 25 Oct 2014 19:40, "Volker Braun" wrote: > In any case, the real WTF of the article (besides the low information density) is that Wolfram sat on the bug report for >1 year and did nothing about it. There must be tons of Sage bugs reported which don't get fixed. You can argue about the serious

Re: [sage-devel] The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 25 Oct 2014 01:55, "Jason Grout" wrote: > > The AMS Notices has a column about using computers to do math, dwelling on some problems they had with Mathematica: > > http://www.ams.org/notices/201410/rnoti-p1249.pdf Somewhat related I see an example last week of where I think the use of compute

Re: [sage-devel] Re: The Misfortunes of a Trio of Mathematicians Using Computer Algebra Systems

On 25 Oct 2014 05:07, "William Stein" wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Jason Grout > wrote: > > And here's a public worksheet: > > https://cloud.sagemath.com/projects/49a2531d-9d02-42c9-9db6-f9551fbfa59e/files/2014-10-24-212837.sagews > > > > (Thanks, William, for making public worksh

Re: [sage-devel] Re: [GDML] [gdml] ICERM report and comments

On 12 September 2014 20:12, rjf wrote: > Maybe I'm missing the kernel of your annoyance. I was struck by the > fact that Beebe says nice things about Common Lisp, and maybe that > was your annoyance -- after all, python version n+1 might be incompatible > with version n; and maybe there is but one

Re: [sage-devel] Fwd: [GDML] [gdml] ICERM report and comments

On 12 September 2014 02:23, William A Stein wrote: > Hi Sage Devs, > > I just received this email which links to a report about "global > digital math libraries" and also a long and opinionated document by > somebody named Nelson Beebe. Since Sage is mentioned a few times in > both documents, I t

Re: [sage-devel] error installing package ppl-1.1

On 9 Sep 2014 00:25, "François Bissey" wrote: > But it is almost certain the system glpk > is the problem. If so, given Sage ships glpk, and quite a number of other packages to ensure that we control exactly the versions being linked, then I suspect the ppl package needs modifying to ensure it l

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 28 August 2014 16:55, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2014-08-28 17:44 UTC+02:00, Jori Mantysalo : >> I am now thinking for example university class using Sage as a part of >> some course. Teachers don't want to use time for being it-support; >> students do not try instal

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 28 Aug 2014 21:58, "kcrisman" wrote: >> >> >> However, can we put VirtualBox and Sage to one .exe? What is really needed >> is to convert http://wiki.sagemath.org/SageAppliance to be just "1) >> Download this .exe, 2) Doubleclick it, 3) Ready". >> >> Yes, I wrote an installer which included the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

>> > The download size of such a subset would be smaller than the full version >> > and MUCH smaller that a virtual machine image, as one doesn't need to >> > include a complete operating system too. > > That's not true. E.g., Puppy Linux is around 50MB, and is a complete > useful operating syst

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 27 August 2014 07:41, Harald Schilly wrote: > > > On Monday, August 25, 2014 10:15:41 AM UTC+2, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby > Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> It seems Sage really could do with a native windows port. > > > Just my 2 cents (after not really readi

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 27 Aug 2014 02:13, "Bill Hart" wrote: > The biggest problem by far is the upstream projects who do not accept patches into their repositories to support Windows, and aren't willing to make the changes to their codebase to support Windows 64. Nor do they continue to maintain the ports once it i

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 25 Aug 2014 14:21, "Jeroen Demeyer" wrote: > > On 2014-08-25 13:27, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) wrote: >> >> I would not think it too hard to generate a parser which is linked to the >> >> * GMP >> * MPFR >> * GNU scientific libr

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 25 Aug 2014 12:44, "Jeroen Demeyer" wrote: > I think Sage-on-Cygwin is fay more realistic than a pure native (even stripped down) version of Sage. I you care about Windows, concentrate your efforts on the Cygwin port. Why has so much time been spent on it, without success? William wrote in 2

Re: [sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 25 Aug 2014 12:19, "Julien Puydt" wrote: > I don't understand why people insist on trying to build the windows port on windows with cygwin ; it's also possible to cross-build windows ports I was mainly thinking of a C++ version with its own parser. If that used Qt or wxWidgits it would be mult

[sage-devel] Re: How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

On 25 Aug 2014 10:37, "maldun" wrote: > > Hi! > > Python XY ( https://code.google.com/p/pythonxy/ )and WinPython ( http://winpython.sourceforge.net/) do this for years now and are working properly. Maybe one can use this as a start since many of the needed prequisites are there. Yes, maybe. > bu

[sage-devel] How practical/useful would a native windows subset be?

It seems Sage really could do with a native windows port. I am wondering how practical it would be to make a version which is a subset of Sage, with something like Qt which runs on Windows, Linux, OSX and Solaris and has the look and feel of those platforms. It could make a Google Summer of Code

Re: [sage-devel] Re: SageMathCloud / closed source / GPL / Spirit of Sage??

I think the whole closed source nature is likely to restrict the takeup of Sage for several broad groups of people when they realise that to get high performance they are going to need to store sensitive material on a Linux server they don't control. As a 50 year old engineer I have worked at thre

Re: [sage-devel] How to test randomness on Sagemath

On 16 August 2014 17:24, Maiass Zaher wrote: > Hi > I need help that i want to implement statistical tests in Sagemath to > inspect the randomness of Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) algorithm's > output > Thanx There is quite a bit of literature on testing pseudo random number generators, whic

[sage-devel] SageMathCloud / closed source / GPL / Spirit of Sage??

As I understand it, the SageMathCloud is closed source. Yet it is making extensive use of open-source code. Maybe the closed source bits don't link to the open-source bits, though I find it a bit hard to believe. If it did not link, it would not that be against the GPL? Or I guess if the code is no

Re: [sage-devel] On scientific computing, Python and Julia

On 9 Aug 2014 02:57, "rjf" wrote: > On Thursday, August 7, 2014 10:55:37 PM UTC-7, Robert Bradshaw wrote: >> The point was that there's a canonical domain in which to do the computation. > > > I have not previously encountered the term "canonical domain". There is > a CAS literature which includ