[sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

John H Palmieri wrote: > It also takes less time if you don't include plots: maybe 5 minutes for > me instead of 8. But sooner or later we'll have to split combinat I think, as you mentioned, since with N threads you're just waiting faster (or rather "in parallel") for the last part to finish,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 5:56:48 PM UTC-7, Andrew wrote: > > In any large document, such as the sage manuals, there are bound to be > uniqueness issues with the choice of labels for references. The best way to > resolve this is for us to start using a specified format for the >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

It also takes less time if you don't include plots: maybe 5 minutes for me instead of 8. On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 10:59:19 PM UTC-7, Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote: > > > Regarding speed, there are two issues: > > > > 1. Building the documentation from scratch. I don't know if we can >

[sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 11:46:22 AM UTC+2, Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote: > > I just ran into a doc issue that has been bothering me for years: global > uniqueness of reference labels in Sphinx. > Use two underscore instead of just one. ...at least, it works for links, I don't know for

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Tuesday, September 6, 2016 at 5:59:19 AM UTC, Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote: > > > Regarding speed, there are two issues: > > > > 1. Building the documentation from scratch. I don't know if we can > expect > > this to go any faster. The PDF version of the documentation is 3,474 > pages > >

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

> Regarding speed, there are two issues: > > 1. Building the documentation from scratch. I don't know if we can expect > this to go any faster. The PDF version of the documentation is 3,474 pages > long. No, wait, that's just the contribution from references/combinat: the > whole reference

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

> In any large document, such as the sage manuals, there are bound to be > uniqueness issues with the choice of labels for references. The best way to > resolve this is for us to start using a specified format for the > references. Currently we do not even have guidelines for this so it is not

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

In any large document, such as the sage manuals, there are bound to be uniqueness issues with the choice of labels for references. The best way to resolve this is for us to start using a specified format for the references. Currently we do not even have guidelines for this so it is not

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

leif writes: >> ... [HP] W. C. Huffman, V. Pless, Fundamentals of Error-Correcting >>Codes, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2003. > > Well, first of all it is stupid to use such a short abbreviation, even > without a year. Presumably it was introduced when references were > local, so we may create a

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 4:56 AM, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > I should perhaps clarify my main question: > > Isn't the unique citation as used in Sphinx a Bad Idea for Sage? > > Most source files in Sage are not ordered, and if we refer to document > [X] in two different

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On 2016-09-05 16:40, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > [...] However, I agree, the docbuilding is fairly fragile > (especially when files have been deleted due to, e.g., changing branches). This annoys me as well. Can we do something against these troubles coming from deleted files? Best, Daniel --

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > Dima Pasechnik writes: >> only a small minority of Sage users actually use terminal. > > How do you know that? Seriously, I'd like to know how our users > distributed across interfaces. It's my impression that

[sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > I just ran into a doc issue that has been bothering me for years: global > uniqueness of reference labels in Sphinx. For instance, in > sage.coding.code_construction, we have: > > > ... [HP] W. C. Huffman, V. Pless, Fundamentals of Error-Correcting >Codes,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

Dima Pasechnik writes: > only a small minority of Sage users actually use terminal. How do you know that? Seriously, I'd like to know how our users distributed across interfaces. It's my impression that quite a lot of casual users of Sage begin with terminal use and never leave it. > And in any

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

> I should perhaps clarify my main question: > > Isn't the unique citation as used in Sphinx a Bad Idea for Sage? > I don't think so. How else could you resolve a reference in a separate file? It would likely lead to a lot of duplication of reference information because of this. Most

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 11:56:35 AM UTC, Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote: > > I should perhaps clarify my main question: > > Isn't the unique citation as used in Sphinx a Bad Idea for Sage? > > Most source files in Sage are not ordered, and if we refer to document > [X] in two different

Re: [sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

I should perhaps clarify my main question: Isn't the unique citation as used in Sphinx a Bad Idea for Sage? Most source files in Sage are not ordered, and if we refer to document [X] in two different source files, we currently have three options: 1) Arbitrarily define [X] in one file and refer

[sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

I've opened #21418 to deal with refs mess in coding/ Should be ready for review soon (there are duplicate references, missed _ in []_, wrong tabulation in docstrings, etc On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 9:59:36 AM UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > > On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 9:46:22 AM

[sage-devel] Re: ReST References in Sphinx and uniqueness

On Monday, September 5, 2016 at 9:46:22 AM UTC, Johan S. R. Nielsen wrote: > > I just ran into a doc issue that has been bothering me for years: global > uniqueness of reference labels in Sphinx. For instance, in > sage.coding.code_construction, we have: > > > .. [HP] W. C. Huffman, V. Pless,