On 11/4/07, Joseph Hufnagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear Sir:
>Thank you for the instructions to building Sage on Ubuntu Linux. The
> compilation took some time, but it was well worth it.
Happy to help.
>
> Thanks again,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 23:12:10
Dear sage-team,
> Perhaps the huge number of singular objects 'sage' is the problem?
> Would step (*) be a problem if there are too many objects?
>
> Do you think it would help if i'd do the whole thing via 'singular.eval',
> assigning names to the (few) essential singular objects myself?
I trie
Simon,
could you send me/us an example to reproduce this? I don't really buy
mabshoff's remark about quadratic runtime of the pexpect interface here
because the input and output are very very little. Btw. mabshoff why is it
quadratic anyway?
Also, getting this functionality into libSINGULAR i
On Nov 4, 2:49 pm, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear John,
Hi Simon,
>
> On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Is it recomputing a Grobner basis for the new ideal? That could be slow.
>
> No, it is simply
>
> > > singular.eval( I.name()+'[%d]' = '%(sz
Dear John,
On Nov 4, 1:45 pm, "John Cremona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it recomputing a Grobner basis for the new ideal? That could be slow.
No, it is simply
> > singular.eval( I.name()+'[%d]' = '%(sz)+p.name())
where sz is ncols(I)+1, and p is a polynomial.
Of course, that line of c
Is it recomputing a Grobner basis for the new ideal? That could be slow.
John
On 04/11/2007, Simon King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear sage-support team,
>
> i have a question on how to do a very simple singular operation (via
> the interface) in the quickest way.
>
> Suppose you have an i
