On Oct 29, 4:46 am, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The relevant file is called config.ini, and the blog entries are
> probably towards the end of that file.
>
> -M. Hampton
Thanks, I have done some configuration on the planet for Sage, so I
should do this in the short term.
> > The plan
The relevant file is called config.ini, and the blog entries are
probably towards the end of that file.
-M. Hampton
On Oct 28, 11:21 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Minh Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Georg,
>
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008
On Wednesday 29 October 2008, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Minh Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Georg,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Georg Muntingh
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Minh,
> >>
> >> Why don't you add your Sage-related blog posts
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Minh Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi Georg,
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Georg Muntingh
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Minh,
>>
>> Why don't you add your Sage-related blog posts to Planet Sage,
>> http://planet.sagemath.org/ ?
>
> OK, I admit
Hi Georg,
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 12:16 AM, Georg Muntingh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Minh,
>
> Why don't you add your Sage-related blog posts to Planet Sage,
> http://planet.sagemath.org/ ?
OK, I admit it: I'm too lazy to shamelessly promote myself :-)
I've known about
http://planet.sagem
Minh,
Why don't you add your Sage-related blog posts to Planet Sage,
http://planet.sagemath.org/ ?
Georg
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more
Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Hi folks,
[...]
I've cleaned up my previous posts to this thread and rewritten them as a
post on my blog. You can find it at
http://mvngu.wordpress.com/2008/10/27/sage-301-reviewed-in-lxf/
That post contains a link to this thread so that readers can follow the
discussion.
a
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 4:04 AM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 25, 3:46 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> (1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they didn't try that,
>> but I would imaginge they would be fast since they are in C.
>
> The Numpy FFT
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Gabriel Gellner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:12:18PM -0400, Gabriel Gellner wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:40:33AM -0500, Jason Grout wrote:
>> >
>> > David Joyner wrote:
>> > > (1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:12:18PM -0400, Gabriel Gellner wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:40:33AM -0500, Jason Grout wrote:
> >
> > David Joyner wrote:
> > > (1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they didn't try that,
> > > but I would imaginge they would be fast since they are in C.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:40:33AM -0500, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> David Joyner wrote:
> > (1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they didn't try that,
> > but I would imaginge they would be fast since they are in C.
>
>
> The current CDF and RDF vectors implement fft using GSL. I'm in the
David Joyner wrote:
> (1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they didn't try that,
> but I would imaginge they would be fast since they are in C.
The current CDF and RDF vectors implement fft using GSL. I'm in the
process of switching the RDF/CDF vector backend to numpy, and then the
fft
On Oct 25, 3:46 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> (1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they didn't try that,
> but I would imaginge they would be fast since they are in C.
The Numpy FFT is fairly quick and AFAIK we only build a subset of the
possible libraries there. Th
(1) Sage also does FFT via the GSL. I guess they didn't try that,
but I would imaginge they would be fast since they are in C.
(2) I'm not sure what a toolbox actually *is*. Something like an
optional package with a nice gui interface?
(3) Related to this thread, I just got an email from Cesar (
William Stein wrote:
> Cool!! Do they explain why Sage gets a relatively low rating, e.g.
> Scilab gets 9 but Sage 6? Is it because of the relative lack of our
> focus on numerics?
Not quite, although it must be noted that the primary focus of Will
Tribbey, the reviewer, was numerical computin
> By the way, I'm not quite sure what "SVD" and "FFT" refer to.
>
I'm guessing it's "Singular Value Decomposition" and "Fast Fourier Transform."
-cc
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gr
Cool!! Do they explain why Sage gets a relatively low rating, e.g.
Scilab gets 9 but Sage 6? Is it because of the relative lack of our
focus on numerics?
On 10/24/08, Minh Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> This morning I received issue 109, September 2008, of "Linux Format"
>
17 matches
Mail list logo
