Where are the comparison operators for graphs implemented? I can find
``__eq__`` in graphs/generic_graph.py, but I can't find any others.
I haven't opened a ticket yet for the following behavior because I am
not sure where the problem is.
The current status is some new math! At the moment, I
On Sep 24, 8:49 am, Simon King simon.k...@nuigalway.ie wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, Simon King simon.k...@nuigalway.ie wrote:
Doing so, the gap and singular interfaces get different file names,
Works.
and moreover the trouble with the @parallel decorator vanishes.
Doesn't. Sorry, another
, 23:25, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
I am having trouble trying to use desolve_system. Am I doing
something wrong? If not, I can create trac tickets for these errors.
1. If I make the reference manual example easier, I get an exception:
sage: t = var('t')
sage: x = function('x
Any guesses when the snazzy new Cython 0.13 will end up in Sage? I
currently have some snazzy C++ code that I want to wrap in Cython
(uses namespaces, etc.), and the new features will make it much
easier.
Thanks!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To
You are both right! The working install is in Sage 4.5.1, and the
broken install is Sage 4.4.3. I tried to rebuild glpk on the
failing machine and noticed that it requested a sage -b in order to
complete the installation. I haven't done that, so I assume it will
work. (I have to wait for some
I am having trouble trying to use desolve_system. Am I doing
something wrong? If not, I can create trac tickets for these errors.
1. If I make the reference manual example easier, I get an exception:
sage: t = var('t')
sage: x = function('x', t)
sage: de1 = diff(x,t) + 1 == 0
sage:
First, I'm hoping someone (e.g. Nathann Cohen) will notice trac #9801
which makes a few corrections to the linear programming part of the
Sage Constructions document. I've fixed one problem, but I'm left
with two more.
1. The maximal matching example code does not like my fix.
sage: g =
I saw in
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/bf3a2494d547230a/3f890b6a4cb79fc3?hl=enie=UTF-#3f890b6a4cb79fc3
that T. Dumont was planning on wrapping a set of modern numerical
methods for ODEs for Sage. Has anyone worked on this?
--
To post to this group, send an email
qed...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/21/2010 02:12 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 8/20/10 2:44 PM, Ryan Hinton wrote:
I have a build of Sage at school that I occasionally update when a bug
or upgrade affects me. I'm the only one who uses it, but it's
installed in a public location (i.e. not writable
2:44 PM, Ryan Hinton wrote:
I have a build of Sage at school that I occasionally update when a bug
or upgrade affects me. I'm the only one who uses it, but it's
installed in a public location (i.e. not writable by me) in case
someone else *might* use it. And because I don't have enough
This seems to work. Thanks!
On Aug 23, 10:17 am, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
You're right, the symbolic link had been dereferenced, so devel/sage
and devel/sage-main were both normal directories. In my sandbox, it
worked to remove devel/sage and recreate it as a link to sage-main
is trying to fix the paths (next output after the Do not
interrupt this message).
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
---
Ryan Hinton
rw...@virginia.edu
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr
On Aug 13, 2:10 am, Johan S. R. Nielsen j.s.r.niel...@mat.dtu.dk
wrote:
My primary objection is that for object-oriented ideology, I think
that constructors should specify what inherently _defines_ some
object. I don't think that the encoder/decoder algorithms do this for
a code.
Well, it
Hello, Johan.
I'm a little confused at your restatement of my idea as well as your
description of your idea. Let me provide some code fragments to be
concrete.
class Code:
def __init__(..., encode_algorithm=['alg_name', args],
decode_algorithm=['alg_name', args], ...):
# handle
Johan,
Replies inline below.
On Aug 3, 3:34 am, Johan S. R. Nielsen j.s.r.niel...@mat.dtu.dk
wrote:
...
I guess that Ensembles as you describe them could be implemented
completely on
top of the object hierarchy I am suggesting. E.g. a XCodesEnsemble
would have
a constructor for specifying
Johan,
I certainly do not qualify as a Sage veteran, but I have done some
work on the engineering side of coding theory (LDPC codes).
Your framework sounds good to me. In fact, it's somewhat similar to
what I have done. In my case, a particular code is relatively
uninteresting, so I have been
On Jul 2, 4:25 pm, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
Well, it's a little dangerous for someone (me) who doesn't really
understand how to *use* the tool to *design the interface* to the
tool. But since I'm
a wiki page instead. See
http://wiki.sagemath.org/symbolics/Indexed expressions
for my thoughts. Thanks for your help!
- Ryan
On Jul 1, 3:29 pm, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
Hi Ryan,
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
I was looking
There was a flurry of activity a while ago (http://groups.google.com/
group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/
f5b976c979a3b784/6ca3d61f4347daf4) regarding multivariate polynomial
multiplication. I am working on asymptotic expansions for a set of
generating functions, and this feature will really
The following results are strange.
sage: import numpy as np
sage: t1 = np.array([3+1])
sage: t2 = t1[0]
sage: t3 = 0
sage: max(t2, t3)
0
sage: min(t2, t3)
4
I get the same results putting t2 and t3 in a tuple for the other max/
min calling convention. But the comparison operator seems to be
On May 29, 3:10 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
On 5/29/10 3:58 PM, Ryan Hinton wrote:
The following results are strange.
sage: import numpy as np
sage: t1 = np.array([3+1])
sage: t2 = t1[0]
sage: t3 = 0
sage: max(t2, t3)
0
sage: min(t2, t3)
4
I get
I am running some Monte Carlo simulations where I construct and pull
apart graphs. If I can get them to run faster, I can get my results
faster or with higher precision/confidence.
I can give details if desired, but most of the processor time is spent
in adding/deleting edges and vertices and
Quick reply inline below.
On May 12, 6:06 pm, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
These discuss (among other things) various approaches to the extra
constraints of the BipartiteGraph class. In particular, we agreed
that add_edge() can raise an exception in cases like this
On May 14, 1:54 pm, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
Are you adding/deleting things using the python functions, or are you
using the Cython interface to the underlying CGraph structure? If you
are using python, you can probably speed up these operations by 100x or so.
My code
The current copy() code creates a new object of the same class as the
original -- a copy in data and type. This matches the copy() method
from the copy module.
sage: g = BipartiteGraph()
sage: g2 = g.copy()
sage: type(g2)
class 'sage.graphs.bipartite_graph.BipartiteGraph'
sage: from copy import
My guess is that people using default labels *do not care* what the
edges are labeled. I would vote for a single default edge label
(instead of the apparent two defaults now), preferably something easy
to detect like None. But I'm not familiar with the source of the
problem, so I don't know how
That looks very nice to me.
On May 4, 1:20 am, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
snip
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group
Thanks for the good suggestions. The challenge is trying to recognize
the variables in derived expressions. I'm sure I can combine your
ideas to produce something suitable.
Thanks!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group,
I'm using variable names with non-alphanumeric characters for
convenience. (Longer story: I have variables with two vector
subscripts.) Should the following be supported?
sage: nn = var('n(0.1)(3.)')
Creating expressions using ``nn`` seems to work fine -- as long as
everything stays in Sage.
Where is the sage.misc.randstate module listed in the reference
manual? I can't find it. Of course, I can get its documentation from
the command line,
sage: sage.misc.randstate?
but then I can't use my command line for trying things out. :-)
Thanks!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an
I just created trac #8651, which is copied here since I don't know to
whom to forward the report.
We all know binomial(n,0) should be 1. But we're not getting that
answer in the following case.
sage: var('n, k')
(n, k)
sage: binomial(n, 0) # this is OK
1
sage: binomial(n, k).subs(k=0) # this
I am in the process of running doctests on a machine with a system-wide
Sage install. I don't have write access to the install area. Several
doctests for doc/common/builder.py try to write to files in the install
area, and so fail. I created trac #8448 for this, but thought I should
post it
Minh,
Thanks for the reply.
On Mar 5, 2:03 pm, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ryan,
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:17 AM, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
I am in the process of running doctests on a machine with a system-wide Sage
install. I don't have write access
And trying again to build Sage 4.3.3, MPIR seems to build fine. Sorry
or the false alarm. Thank you very much for your help!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
I just tried building MPIR 1.3.1 on /tmp -- a local file system --
instead of the network file system I was using before. Suddenly, it
works!
I assume the next Sage release will include this MPIR revision. Sage
4.3.3 (MPIR 1.2.2) fails to build yasm as before.
Thanks!
- Ryan
--
To post to
Thanks for pointing to the new thread. :-)
Yes, the same problem exists for add_edge(). At a minimum, and add/
delete vertex and add edge code needs to be overridden for
BipartiteGraph. I've done the delete vertex and can do the others,
but I wanted to clear up the long-term approach first.
-
On Feb 26, 8:03 pm, Robert Miller r...@rlmiller.org wrote:
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
...
OK, assume we solve (1) by requiring an indication of which partition
a vertex belongs in and raising an exception otherwise. What about
Graph algorithms
Incidentally, this is my option (A). I agree it is the cleanest
option. (See my comments on the original thread, http://
groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/
bff3af2a3c77b4b6.)
- Ryan
On Feb 27, 1:45 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
Perhaps the
I tried the same exercise on a related Xeon cluster -- with the same
failure on mpn/.libs/add_n.o. I will be on #sage-devel (IRC) off and
on if anyone wants to work on this real-time.
The (new) config.log is at http://hintonclan.org/iobass/mpir-
config.log. The behavior in both cases appears to
touch the Graph or GenericGraph
classes. Any necessary changes are handled by overriding methods.
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
It looks like you're also supporting option (C) for solving problem
(2): very interesting. Since you wrote most of this code, your
I'm having a lovely conversation with myself in the comments for trac
#8350 that I want to share. :-)
There are two related problems.
1. The current BipartiteGraph class is incomplete, see trac #1941. I
want to use it, so I'm trying to plug some of the holes. In
particular, trac #8350
Thanks for the reply. Response to your suggestions below.
On Feb 26, 1:21 pm, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
...snip...
I considered another option. Why not just wait until an edge is added
to figure out whether a node is left or right? Because all the
vertices should be in one
Slow response, but here it is.
I'm working on the school computing cluster. It runs Rocks 5.1 (V.I),
which I believe is a RedHat derivative (/bin/rpm exists, for one...).
Here is the GCC version.
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure
I've cleaned and retried this a few times but without any luck. I'm
happy to provide more detailed information or try a debug session over
IRC. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
$ uname -a
Linux myhostname 2.6.29-2 #1 SMP Tue May 19 12:56:32 EDT 2009 x86_64
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$
Most classes in Sage have a .parent() method. I'm not a proper
mathematician, so I'm not sure what it really means, but I use it for
debugging occasionally. :-)
The Graph class does not have this method. Should it? What should it
return?
Thanks!
- Ryan
--
To post to this group, send an
I am trying to convert a multivariate polynomial to the symbolic ring
for manipulation. In particular, subs() for the polynomial was *really*
slow. I think the following should work.
R.a,b = QQ[]
eq = a^2 + 2*b
sreq = SR(eq)
sra, srb = sreq.variables()
sreq.subs(sra=3)
# should return 9 +
I compiled Sage on two nearly identical machines at school. One
succeeded, the other failed building givaro (see make output below).
I did a quick Google search on the error message, and one author called
this the dangling extern C syndrome. Sure enough, the givaro header
gmp++.h (see
OK, this is now #6581. I assume it's just the
MPolynomialRing_polydict class missing the monomial_divides method.
Can anybody recommend a good approach for this?
Thanks!
- Ryan
On Jul 21, 12:44 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Ryan
!
---
Ryan Hinton
PhD candidate, electrical engineering
University of Virginia
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options
Are there any (good) numerical ODE solvers in Sage at the moment? Are
any available via optional spkgs?
Thanks!
---
Ryan Hinton
rw...@virginia.edu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from
/release-cycles-3.4.1/
Please build, test and report any issues.
Cheers,
Michael
Merged in Sage 3.4.1.alpha0:
#2129: William Stein, Ryan Hinton: implement sage -t for .spyx files
[Reviewed by Jason Grout]
#2551: Francis Clarke: __getitem__ for relative number field elements
Unfortunately, I don't know what on earth is_primitive() is doing there.
I didn't put it there. I wrote the patch to as a performance
enhancement to the _existing_ is_primitive implementation. is_primitive
was there already, so the current ticket is probably not the best place
to discuss
, if
anything, should we take is_primitive() to mean for polynomials in
F[x] where F is an infinite field?
John
2009/3/18 Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com:
Unfortunately, I don't know what on earth is_primitive() is doing there.
I didn't put it there. I wrote the patch to as a performance
enhancement
as it is clearly documented. Perhaps a
Wiki page, FAQ entry, and/or manual entry of differences between Cython
and Python.
Thanks!
- Ryan
Ryan Hinton wrote:
Robert,
Since I hit the problem I'm motivated to chime in. I also followed the
email trail on the cython list.
Quick summary
Robert,
Since I hit the problem I'm motivated to chime in. I also followed the
email trail on the cython list.
Quick summary:
[X] Let the programmer decide, with
[X'] Get 4 as the default
There are obviously some cases where speed is paramount and others where
Python compatibility is
of Computation, 69, 230 (2000), 757--765.
[4] A. K. Lenstra. Factoring multivariate polynomials over finite
fields. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 30:235–248, 1985.
---
Ryan Hinton
PhD candidate, Electrical Engineering
University of Virginia
efficiently over GF(2).
John Cremona
PS See http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/J.E.Cremona/theses/index.html
for the thesis (it's the last one)
PS I have paper copy (only) of the Lenstra paper
2009/3/6 Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com:
Thanks in advance for any help. Please let me know if I'm
William Stein wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Carl Witty carl.wi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:35 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Ryan Hinton iob...@email.com wrote:
...
So I'm trying to implement a search
algorithm similar
on matrices and polynomials over GF(2), Sage seems a good choice.
But I need a place to put my file(s)!
Opinions and feedback are welcome.
Thanks!
[1] ``Improved Long-Period Generators Based on Linear Recurrences Modulo
2'', ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 32, 1 (2006), 1-16.
---
Ryan
59 matches
Mail list logo
