-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 452
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SageManifolds: a package for differential geometry in Sage #14865
Comments
Attachment: manifolds-0.1.spkg.gz The SageManifolds package |
comment:2
Hellooooooo guys !! Very recently a very large amount of code dealing with matroids was accepted into Sage (#7477). This project had been developped outside of Sage for a while (it was 21 000 lines long), and the authors then wanted ot make it a real part of Sage. The problem is that the source code that makes it into Sage normally gets reviewed before, and we were not able to review the matroids code as we usually do as it was really, really too large. I personally felt very guilty to see all this code make it into Sage without discussions and reviews Have fuuuuuuuuuuun anyway !! Nathann |
comment:4
Dear Nathann, I see your point. However note that it was difficult to submit the package at an earlier stage for it was very fluctuating: various trials were performed and new classes/functionalities were introduced and then removed. The current version is, I think, the first one showable and to be discussed. It can be considered as a more or less stable root for expanding the package. To have a minimum of chart/frame flexibility and a minimum of tensor calculus (with symmetries/antisymmetries properly delt with), it required these 16,000 lines. Not however that not all of them are Python code: there is a lot of docstrings. Maybe the Python code is only one third of the total. If, hopefully, SageManifolds is integrated into Sage some day, it should be much larger than 16,000 lines. |
comment:5
Replying to @egourgoulhon:
+1. Larger/more experimental projects need a more nimble approach to experimenting and trying out their interface. Including little tidbits into sage early on takes away the ability to easily change API/interface/design (that's hard enough without all the bureaucracy the sage patch system imposes). The development system of sage is geared towards stable, production quality code (regardless of whether that's attained), and that is incompatible with experimental, fast development. I suspect we'd get the best quality if someone would first write a package independently (building on sage or another computer algebra system) and, once that system proves its worth, reimplement it as sage library code. The duplication of effort in that system is a bit unfortunate and, in practice, probably prohibitive. I don't think we know yet what the best solution is. Note that for attracting funding, the "independent package" system is better: First you may be able to attract funding for developing a brand new package with revolutionary functionality. Later you can attract funding for ensuring that this revolutionary package gets integrated with other math software, so that it can interoperate with other systems. It also helps the authors more, because there's the independent entity to point to as accomplishment, rather than just an amorphous set of patches or files in the sage library. |
comment:7
We have just added a tutorial introducing the package at http://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/documentation.html A mailing list has also been opened: |
New version of the SageManifolds package |
comment:8
Attachment: manifolds-0.2.spkg.gz Hi all, During the summer, we have improved the SageManifolds package, resulting in version 0.2. The changelog is here. For the end user, the main change regards the declaration of a chart: the range of each coordinate has to be passed as an invertal (the default being R = (-oo, oo)). |
Attachment: manifolds-0.3.spkg.gz Version 0.3 of SageManifolds package |
comment:9
Hi all, We have just released a new version (0.3) of the SageManifolds package. With respect to the previous version, the main changes are
See the project home page for examples and documentation. |
Commit: |
Branch: u/egourgoulhon/SageManifolds |
comment:12
Hi All, The latest development sources have been migrated to github, in a fork of Sage 6.0 master branch, see http://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/install_from_git.txt |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
SageManifolds 0.4 spkg |
comment:15
Attachment: manifolds-0.4.spkg.gz Hi, We have released a new version (0.4) of SageManifolds. There are almost no new functionalities in this version, but the internal code has been seriously amended with respect to version 0.3. In particular the coordinate charts and the vector frames have been made hashable and are used as keys in various dictionaries (like the dictionary of sets of components of a given tensor field with respect to various vector frames). The sources of version 0.4 are available in the branch u/egourgoulhon/SageManifolds of trac.sagemath.org. The development version is at https://github.com/sagemanifolds/ and can be installed according to these instructions. |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Dependencies: #15916 |
comment:19
This ticket contains now only the "differential" part of SageManifolds (manifolds and tensor fields); the pure algebraic part (tensors on free modules) is in ticket #15916, which must be pulled first. |
comment:20
This is now part of SageManifolds v0.5 (see this post on sage-devel and http://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr/changelog.html) |
comment:21
Do I understand correctly: The project is not intended to be an optional/standard spkg (so, the attached spkg is obsolete), but is purely in the Sage library? Are the installation instructions from comment:15 really relevant? After all, there is a branch attached to this ticket, so, |
comment:22
Replying to @simon-king-jena:
Yes the ultimate goal is that it is fully integrated into Sage library.
The branch attached to this ticket is sticked to version 0.5 (until version 0.6 is released), while the github repository mentionned in comment:15 contains the development version. See also the section "Installing the latest development version" in his page. If you want version 0.5 only, |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:26
The ticket has been updated to coincide with the latest release (0.6) of SageManifolds. The main changes are listed here. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:29
This ticket is now obsolete; see the metaticket #18528 instead. |
comment:31
can be closed as duplicate |
comment:32
Closing tickets in the sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix module with positive_review (i.e. someone has confirmed they should be closed). |
** This ticket is now obsolete: see the metaticket #18528 instead **
This is the first draft of SageManifolds, a project to implement differential geometry and tensor calculus in Sage. It is still at a very early stage; current functionalities include:
More details on the page http://sagemanifolds.obspm.fr
The package is still very preliminary. Future developments will focuss on
Volunteers are welcome !
Note (added on 18 Jul 2014): this ticket contains now version 0.5 (in the associated git branch) and the attached spkg are obsolete.
Note (added on 13 March 2015): SageManifolds has been updated to version 0.7; the git branch associated with this ticket is (provisory) obsolete; the ticket should be reorganized soon.
Depends on #15916
CC: @videlec @jvkersch @novoselt @simon-king-jena
Component: packages: experimental
Keywords: differential geometry, tensor calculus
Author: Michal Bejger, Eric Gourgoulhon
Branch/Commit: u/egourgoulhon/SageManifolds @
185d5b8
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14865
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: