Hi, On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:44:22 +0200 Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - In the three points explaining what Sage is more precisely you write that > we have "new code ... that unifies" leaving the impression that all/most of > our code is just interface stuff, i.e. the new implementations of algorithms > etc. are not mentioned. I also think this should be emphasized. There are many people who think Sage is either wrapping functionality that is already there, or rewriting it to make it faster. It would be good to mention new algorithms/implementations that are just in Sage. I suppose becoming a viable alternative to the M's includes becoming a platform for development of new algorithms. It might be a good idea to show how Sage cites the papers where nontrivial algorithms are described in the doc strings as well. I like this example: sage: R = GF(2)['x'] sage: p = R.random_element() sage: p.small_roots?? I think Martin should have added his name to that with an AUTHOR tag. Maybe a non-cryptography related example would be better, since there also seems to be a feeling that Sage is mainly about cryptography. Burcin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
