Sébastien's profile - activity

Interesting! Thanks for the remark!

Alternatively, in the Jupyter notebook, if graphviz + dot2tex are installed, here is what you can obtain: It is a fea

See https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/39598 for adding in SageMath the decomposition into any subgraphs.

This is a typical universal cover problem which can be solved using Knuth dancing links' algorithm: def has_claw_decomp

This is a typical universal cover problem which can be solved using Knuth dancing links' algorithm: def has_claw_decomp

This is a typical universal cover problem which can be solved using Knuth dancing links' algorithm: def has_claw_decomp

The seven pieces are said to be different on the Cube Soma Wikipedia page, but you have defined P5 and P6 to be the same

The seven pieces are said to be different on the Cube Soma Wikipedia page, but you have defined P5 and P6 to be the same

The seven pieces are said to be different on the Cube Soma Wikipedia page, but you have defined P5 and P6 to be the same

The seven pieces are said to be different on the Wikipedia page, but you have defined P5 and P6 to be the same: P5 = Po

As shown in the documentation of g.plot, you may use edge_style='dashed'. But unfortunately, it plots every edge to be d

As shown in the documentation of g.plot, you may use edge_style='dashed'. But unfortunately, it plots every edge to be d

As shown in the documentation of g.plot, you may use edge_style='dashed'. But unfortunately, it plots every edge to be d

As shown in the documentation of G.plot, you may use edge_style='dashed'. But unfortunately, it plots every edge to be d

I don't understand the error either, but this is what one may do: sage: A = matrix(2,3,[8,-2,3,5,1,-4]) sage: A [ 8 -2

I don't understand the error either, but this is what one should do: sage: A = matrix(2,3,[8,-2,3,5,1,-4]) sage: A [ 8

You may need to adapt the autogenerated conf.py file. For instance, here is what I wrote in lines 25-28: sys.path.appen

Or maybe the Sphinx installed within SageMath 9.5 is not built with optional extensions like sage_autodoc? Is this the s

There is a normal_fan method for polytopes. Also, you may read this quick tutorial or this longer introduction on polyto

The Stanley_Reisner_ideal function exists in SageMath for a rational polyhedral fan : sage: fan = Fan([[0,1,3], [3,4],

The Stanley_Reisner_ideal function exists in SageMath for a rational polyhedral fan : sage: fan = Fan([[0,1,3], [3,4],

The Stanley_Reisner_ideal function exists in SageMath for a rational polyhedral fan : sage: fan = Fan([[0,1,3], [3,4],

The Stanley_Reisner_ideal function exists in SageMath for a rational polyhedral fan : sage: fan = Fan([[0,1,3], [3,4],

The Stanley_Reisner_ideal function exists in SageMath for a rational polyhedral fan or for the toric variety associated

The Stanley_reisner_ideal function exists in SageMath for a rational polyhedral fan or for the toric variety associated

For the easier example, you may do: sage: x=polygen(ZZ, 'x') sage: K.<a>=NumberField(x^2+5) sage: K.different() F

For the easier example, you may do: sage: x=polygen(ZZ, 'x') sage: K.<a>=NumberField(x^2+5) sage: K.different() F

If you want to list methods of K containing the word "ideal", you may do: sage: K.*ideal*? K.fractional_ideal K.ideal K

I do run make doc within sage -sh for building the documentation of my package

I do run make doc within sage -sh for building the documentation of my package: https://gitlab.com/seblabbe/slabbe/-/blo

In Sage/Python, you need to add the parenthesis to "call" the function. Without the parenthesis, it returns the function

I created issue #38187 on github

I created a issue on github here : https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/38187

In my case, on my recent laptop, it's not me that kills it. The operation kills itself after less than 1 second. On my

In my case, it's not me that kills it. The operation kills itself after less than 1 second.

I can confirm I have the same issue on SageMath version 10.2: sage: # define p_fine as above sage: it = p_fine.triangul

First, we need to thank you for taking the time to share this experience and asking this question. I think we need more

First, we need to thank you for taking the time to share this experience and asking this question. I think we need more