Re: [sage-devel] Re: run doctests of a single function

It's certainly doable, though an initial attempt needs a bit more work (I have to go teach now, so taking a break). What scope do we want to support? Running doctests on an object that has a __doc__ attribute is certainly possible, though getting line numbers to match what's expected will take

Re: [sage-devel] Re: run doctests of a single function

I think you do not even need f.__doc__ as the argument, f alone suffices. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

Re: [sage-devel] Re: run doctests of a single function

On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 8:47:04 AM UTC-5, Erik Bray wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Jan Groenewald > wrote: > > Hi > > > > On 16 November 2016 at 14:35, Simon King > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Franco, > >> > >> On 2016-11-15,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: "Tri bool"

Le 16/11/2016 à 18:01, Volker Braun a écrit : > Exception don't handle the Indeterminate or True => True case. > > If you really need the entire logic then the imho best solution is to be > explicit; Define values True3, False3, Undefined3 that are independent > of booleans and function

[sage-devel] Re: "Tri bool"

Exception don't handle the Indeterminate or True => True case. If you really need the entire logic then the imho best solution is to be explicit; Define values True3, False3, Undefined3 that are independent of booleans and function Bool3.and(), Bool3.or(), ... for logic. On Wednesday,

[sage-devel] Re: "Tri bool"

On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 2:59:06 AM UTC-8, Simon King wrote: > > But I don't see why "too much discussion" should be enough reason to kill > a PEP. After all, it isn't bike shedding but a non-trivial extension > with potentially useful applications. > Guido gives other reasons why he

[sage-combinat-devel] Re: kronecker coefficient

Perhaps Andrew can weigh in on putting Kronecker coefficients with partition tuples, but it feels somewhat artificial to me. Instead, I like the explicitness of the syntax la.kronecker_coefficient(mu, nu) and/or having some (lazily imported) global namespace function of kronecker_coefficient

[sage-devel] Re: "Tri bool"

The way I would handle those cases, is by raising an exception. The same way that you raise an exception when the software is not able to give any other answer that you might ask. El martes, 15 de noviembre de 2016, 8:22:15 (UTC+1), tdumont escribió: > > When developing a software which aims

Re: [sage-devel] Re: run doctests of a single function

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Jan Groenewald wrote: > Hi > > On 16 November 2016 at 14:35, Simon King wrote: >> >> Hi Franco, >> >> On 2016-11-15, Franco Saliola wrote: >> > I'm wondering whether there is a way to run the doctests

Re: [sage-devel] why chrome kiosk mode in sage appliance??

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 2:28 AM, William Stein wrote: > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: >> >> >> On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 9:35:23 PM UTC, William wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Dima Pasechnik

Re: [sage-devel] Re: run doctests of a single function

Hi On 16 November 2016 at 14:35, Simon King wrote: > Hi Franco, > > On 2016-11-15, Franco Saliola wrote: > > I'm wondering whether there is a way to run the doctests of a single > > function. > > Would indeed be nice to have. And thank you for

[sage-devel] Re: run doctests of a single function

Hi Franco, On 2016-11-15, Franco Saliola wrote: > I'm wondering whether there is a way to run the doctests of a single > function. Would indeed be nice to have. And thank you for pointing out run_doctests() --- I haven't been aware of it. Cheers, Simon -- You received this

Re: [sage-devel] why chrome kiosk mode in sage appliance??

On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 at 1:28:44 AM UTC, William wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Dima Pasechnik > wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 9:35:23 PM UTC, William wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Dima Pasechnik

[sage-devel] Re: Errors from importing abs

On Tuesday, November 15, 2016 at 6:32:34 PM UTC+1, Nils Bruin wrote: > > On Monday, November 14, 2016 at 10:49:56 PM UTC-8, Ralf Stephan wrote: >> >> >> so it seems the Python abs can be overridden. >> > > Yes, abs is not a keyword. It's just a name that's by default bound to > __builtin__.abs .