Re: [sage-devel] How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

Ahhh On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 6:09:02 PM UTC+2, David Roe wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Simon Brandhorst > wrote: > >> I am aware of this. It is just unexpected that other.__eq__(self) calls >> self._eq(other) >> >> As a user of that rich cmp method I

[sage-devel] Workaround for ipython build hang

There is #24088 already in positive_review. But as a sidenote: I was able to compile Sage with many, many rounds. So here is a workaround to those seeing an error from ipython in compilation: until make; do echo Duh. Another try.; done -- Jori Mäntysalo

[sage-devel] Re: How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

> > (how often is the first > > thing you do is verify the object has a compatible type?). > > Almost never, at least for elements! > > For elements (not for parents, though), one is supposed to > implement single underscore arithmetic *and* comparison methods, > which will only be called

Re: [sage-devel] How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

> I am aware of this. It is just unexpected that other.__eq__(self) calls >> self._eq(other) >> >> As a user of that rich cmp method I would have expected it to call >> other._eq(self). >> >> Raising a not implemented error seems nice. :) >> > > Note that it should return NotImplemented (a built

[sage-devel] broken docbuild in SageMath 8.1.beta9

In the current develop branch, running "make doc-clean" and then "sage --docbuild reference html" spews a long error message on building [manifolds], of which the most illuminating section is: OSError: [manifolds]

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

There are various https-only software repos, not only Python or R-relayed. IIRC kernel.org is one of them. Without SSL headers one cannot build tools to access such repos; e.g. there are no such headers in Xcode. One may keep repeating "optional" etc mantras, but it does not make

Re: [sage-devel] How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Simon Brandhorst wrote: > I am aware of this. It is just unexpected that other.__eq__(self) calls > self._eq(other) > > As a user of that rich cmp method I would have expected it to call > other._eq(self). > > Raising a not implemented error

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Nathan Dunfield wrote: > On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 7:32:03 AM UTC-5, Erik Bray wrote: >> >> > I also balk at the idea of shipping a crippled pip. >> >> It's not crippled if you don't need it to install from HTTPS which not >> everyone

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

By the way, on OS X, an SSL-enabled curl is installed along with Xcode, so if we use that in Sage, I wonder if R will work with full functionality. (See #24081.) If so, OpenSSL would only be "needed" for Sage's pip. John On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 9:05:16 AM UTC-7, Erik Bray wrote: > >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > >> >> Other participants to discussion, which did not formally vote, or "threw >> their vote away" ((C) Michael Orlitzky) in favor of another option : 10 >> people > > > No : make that 7 people... > >>

Re: [sage-devel] Re: sage stuck with GNU parallel

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:50 AM Sebastiano Vigna wrote: > > > I know about @parallel, but in this case sage is part of a pipeline of > transformations, including generated code. @parallel would be a pain to > use. From what I understand it is not considered a bug that

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

> > Other participants to discussion, which did not formally vote, or "threw > their vote away" ((C) Michael Orlitzky) in favor of another option : 10 > people > No : make that 7 people... > David Joyner > Michael Orlitzky > Nicolas M Thiéry > Dr David Kirby > Thierry

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Vote tally Each vote is linked (via google groups) to the last expression of the vote. Yes, we should fully support OpenSSL now, and clarify the licensing issue : 11 unambiguous votes : Erik Bray Dima Pasechnik

Re: [sage-devel] Re: sage stuck with GNU parallel

Il giorno lunedì 23 ottobre 2017 14:29:35 UTC+2, William ha scritto: > > > Use the @parallel decorator from within Sage instead: > > http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/parallel/index.html > > William > > > I know about @parallel, but in this case sage is part of a pipeline of

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 7:32:03 AM UTC-5, Erik Bray wrote: > > > I also balk at the idea of shipping a crippled pip. > > It's not crippled if you don't need it to install from HTTPS which not > everyone does. > I agree with Emmanuel that providing "pip" without HTTPS is shipping a

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Vote is closed. A tally of the vote should follow more or less quickly (I have about a hundredth of message to review...). A tally of the comments will take longer. Expect it at the start of a new thread. -- Emmanuel Charpentier -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 15:44:09 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > >> It should be possible to disable the requirement at > >> configure time and fallback to a different default. It's a shame we > >>

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Le 23/10/2017 à 15:40, Emmanuel Charpentier a écrit : > BTW : the vote closes in about 20 minutes. This is your last chance to > take back any "too hasty" votes. My vote: no openSSL now - wait until the license issues are solved Snark on #sagemath -- You received this message because you are

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >> It should be possible to disable the requirement at >> configure time and fallback to a different default. It's a shame we >> require a patch for this for now but I can help push for an upstream >> fix

[sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

My vote : |X| Yes, we should fully support OpenSSL now, and clarify the licensing issue. BTW : the vote closes in about 20 minutes. This is your last chance to take back any "too hasty" votes. -- Emmanuel Charpentier -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 14:32:03 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : >> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Le lundi 23 octobre 2017

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 14:43:18 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Erik Bray > wrote: > > The same should be true for R, > > and if this is not the case (and I'm not convinced it isn't) > > This part I take back. I see now that in R's

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 14:32:03 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > > > > > > Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 12:17:06 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Emmanuel

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Erik Bray wrote: > The same should be true for R, > and if this is not the case (and I'm not convinced it isn't) This part I take back. I see now that in R's configure it really does refuse to proceed if it doesn't find the right libcurl

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 12:17:06 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : >> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Emmanuel Charpentier >> wrote: >> > Dear Erik, >> > >> > Le lundi 23

Re: [sage-devel] Re: sage stuck with GNU parallel

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:49 AM, Sebastiano Vigna wrote: > > > Il giorno lunedì 23 ottobre 2017 10:45:31 UTC+2, Sebastiano Vigna ha > scritto: >> >> I am trying to use multiple sage instances on a Linux machine using GNU >> parallel. sage works perfectly from the

Re: [sage-devel] How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

I am aware of this. It is just unexpected that other.__eq__(self) calls self._eq(other) As a user of that rich cmp method I would have expected it to call other._eq(self). Raising a not implemented error seems nice. :) Anyways I believe it should be better documented if you want people to use

[sage-devel] Re: sage stuck with GNU parallel

Il giorno lunedì 23 ottobre 2017 10:45:31 UTC+2, Sebastiano Vigna ha scritto: > > I am trying to use multiple sage instances on a Linux machine using GNU > parallel. sage works perfectly from the command line, but gets stuck (ps > gives a "T" state--stopped) when I try to run it with

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 12:17:06 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > > Dear Erik, > > > > Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 11:16:05 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Emmanuel

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Dear Jeroen Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 11:24:18 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : > > On 2017-10-19 17:21, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > I do not think that a > > non-communicating R is useful in Sage. > > A non-communicating R in Sage can be very useful if you are not using R > in Sage at all

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > Dear Erik, > > Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 11:16:05 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : >> >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier >> wrote: >> > Again : R is not only a

Re: [sage-devel] Use system R with sage?

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:47 PM, François Bissey wrote: > > > On 21/10/2017, at 10:37, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On 10/20/2017 11:30 AM, Nils Bruin wrote: > > Do we actually get real benefit from packaging R with sage? It seems to > me R is a very

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Bug? Sympy, Fricas & Giac can solve this simple integral, why not Maxima?

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > On Saturday, October 21, 2017 at 10:52:48 PM UTC+1, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: >> >> That doesn't tell us why Maxima thiks that this is a Cauch principal >> value. In fact : >> sage:

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

Dear Erik, Le lundi 23 octobre 2017 11:16:05 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit : > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier > wrote: > > Again : R is not only a software package but also an ecosystem. The > 11638 > > (as of today) packages available to R users

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Erik Bray wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Jeroen Demeyer > wrote: >> On 2017-10-19 17:21, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >>> >>> I do not think that a >>> non-communicating R is useful in Sage. >> >> >> A

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > On 2017-10-19 17:21, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >> >> I do not think that a >> non-communicating R is useful in Sage. > > > A non-communicating R in Sage can be very useful if you are not using R in > Sage at all

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On 2017-10-19 17:21, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: I do not think that a non-communicating R is useful in Sage. A non-communicating R in Sage can be very useful if you are not using R in Sage at all (which is very likely the vast majority of Sage users). -- You received this message because

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > On 2017-10-19 20:07, Luca De Feo wrote: >> >> There you go for something crippled! https://shattered.io/ > > > I don't think that this is actually relevant. This attack would only work if > an attacker is able to

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Thierry wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 08:07:19PM +0200, Luca De Feo wrote: >> |X| Yes, we should fully support OpenSSL now, and clarify the >> licensing issue. >> >> > the way our >> > "package manager" works allows

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > > > Le mercredi 18 octobre 2017 20:36:47 UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : >> >> On 2017-10-18 19:02, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: >> > This option commits us to maintain (unnecessary and dangerous, IMHO)

Re: [sage-devel] Re: VOTE: inclusion of OpenSSL in Sage

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Emmanuel Charpentier wrote: > Again : R is not only a software package but also an ecosystem. The 11638 > (as of today) packages available to R users are a large part of R usefulness > to its users. So, "disabling downloads from

Re: [sage-devel] How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

This is an infinite loop: : if type(other)!=type(self): : #other knows how to do the comparison : return other.__eq__(self) The correct Python thing to do is to return NotImplemented in this case. -- You received this message because you are

[sage-devel] sage stuck with GNU parallel

I am trying to use multiple sage instances on a Linux machine using GNU parallel. sage works perfectly from the command line, but gets stuck (ps gives a "T" state--stopped) when I try to run it with parallel. If I run sage dist-xoroshiro128/24-9-11.sage everything works fine. If I run echo |

[sage-devel] Re: How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

Hi Travis, On 2017-10-23, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > (how often is the first > thing you do is verify the object has a compatible type?). Almost never, at least for elements! For elements (not for parents, though), one is supposed to implement single underscore arithmetic

Re: [sage-devel] How do I overwrite comparison for modules?

Mhh okay, I can see that point. On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 6:23:50 AM UTC+2, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 19, 2017 at 8:59:17 PM UTC-5, Simon Brandhorst wrote: >> >> Well richcmp allows you to define just one method. But it does not save >> you any work at all if the