Harald Schilly wrote: > On Jul 22, 10:38 am, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've posted a new version of my ISSAC talk to ... > > hi, here are some ideas that come to my mind... > > 1. you talk about cython and python. that's ok, but you are only > talking about the "solution" to a problem without explaining the > problem. I think you should explain, that there is a need to have two > layers. A powerful high level approach (solution: python), to state > algorithms and combine classes of objects and a low level approach to > implement fast, easy to maintain code and library interfaces. The > whole project wouldn't work, if one of them is missing. (i.e. only C++ > or only python). I think that's important to explain. > > 2. combinatorics, point 4. you mention open source packages like > networkX. maybe this is not widely known and you should either explain > it or just say, that you use a very good open source package for > "blah" - so, more focus on the functionality, not a name that probably > doesn't transport anything to the audience > > 3. i wouldn't show how to interface with mma. if someone asks, ok, but > not during the talk. at least you have a certain reason to. well, and > you can also bring the PartitionsP speed example (as a proof of > concept for point 1. above) >
You could point out that their licensing agreement seems to make accessing mma over http illegal (even if it is secure and you have your own personal license), and when we asked for clarification, we got vague responses and when asking for more clarification, no response. I think pointing out some of the silly, artificial restrictions in software licenses might help the case for open-source software. > 4. maybe you have, but also tell the audience, that the documentation > of the code is very important. i.e. students can learn about the inner > workings just as "easily" as they can write programs in sage (same > language, ...). this strengthens the python language for general > scientific usage and is not specific to sage. there is no dedicated > technical barrier between users and developers. > > 5. future ... maybe also some general closing words about the > scientific ecosystem of mathematics: by sharing code and > implementations openly, the quality is higher and so on. this is > trivial, but you could say that sage wants to push into that > direction. (at least i think it wants to and this is point where sage > doesn't want to copy the big M*s ;) > > h > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
