Can you please provide an example where things do not work? Are you talking
about manifolds or cell complexes or some other classes?
On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 1:14:32 PM UTC-7 Ezra Akresh wrote:
> In a recent project, my team and I developed functions for the cup product
> and wedge product
On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 12:52:16 PM UTC-7 David Roe wrote:
How do you handle files that depend on multiple libraries (like both FLINT
and NTL for example)? Are these only included in sagemath-standard?
In many cases, such multiple dependencies are gratuitous and can be
resolved by
In a recent project, my team and I developed functions for the cup product
and wedge product of cochains utilizing the functionality of various Sage
classes. We noticed that the current cup product function only works for
0-simplices because the orientations do not match. We were wondering if
How do you handle files that depend on multiple libraries (like both FLINT
and NTL for example)? Are these only included in sagemath-standard?
David
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 2:19 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
> On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 11:07:36 AM UTC-7 David Roe wrote:
>
> I assume that the
On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 11:07:36 AM UTC-7 David Roe wrote:
I assume that the MANIFEST.in.m4 file contains a list of what's in each
package, right?
That's right, this is the current mechanism.
I have plans for switching this to something more maintainable, which will
also enforce that the
I assume that the MANIFEST.in.m4 file contains a list of what's in each
package, right? There's also sagemath-objects and sagemath-categories (are
there any others?); can you send analogous links for those so that we can
understand how the library is being broken up into pieces? Is every file
(index of previous posts: https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/29705)
A common wisdom applies: *Do your combinatorial explosions at home, not in
public.*
In other words, we should not attempt to define a distribution package for
every possible community or subfield of mathematics that Sage
>
On 2023-06-15 18:08:35, 'Travis Scrimshaw' via sage-devel wrote:
>
> That is simply not true right now. The # optional sage.* doctests as a
> user-visible change.
>
These tags aren't essential to the modularization itself. They're an
artifact of bad tests:
* doctests are in general just a
Perhaps one can introduce a tag #needsmodule
Yours is the
latest: https://github.com/sagemath/sage/issues/35750#issuecomment-1594072121
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023, 02:08 'Travis Scrimshaw' via sage-devel, <
sage-devel@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 10:53:38 AM UTC+9 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>
> On Sunday, June 11, 2023 at 6:20:03 PM UTC-7 Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
> My understanding of William's goal (please
10 matches
Mail list logo
