On 10/4/07, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/4/07, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This is precisely the behavior you're describing. > > > > Actually it isn't precisely the same behavior. If I do > > Another difference is that > > sage: edit(foo) > > will work even if the function foo is defined in compiled > Cython code. > > The modifications needed to make all this work might > be too sage-specific for inclusion in IPython. I'm not sure yet.
Well, since the ipython one is meant to be fairly flexible, we'd be happy to add in extension points to make it possible for sage to get what it needs while reusing the existing machinery, if possible. Obviously feel free to ignore all this, I just point out where the underlying system is already close (if not identical) to what you need in case it's possible for sage to better play with upstream. Cheers, f --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
