Maurizio wrote: > Hello, > I'm forwarding this to sage-devel as well, maybe being the most > appropriate group to address this issue. > > I'm a happy user of SAGE, and I won't stop thanking all you guys for > this wonderful job! Although, I also try to encourage you in getting > something better (from my point of view). > > It seems there has been some serious thinking about including a UNITS > of MEASUREMENTS managing package in SAGE: > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_frm/thread/8791448b7... > > From this, a SAGE trac ticket has been opened (#3852): > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3852 > > This is supposed to be a MAJOR priority ticket, and I think this is a > very appropriate description!
I agree. I should also add that nearly every ticket in trac is marked as major priority. Indeed, there are lots and lots of things to do on Sage. That's why we really appreciate your help! > The ticket has a very good (although a bit old now) description of the > different packages available to deal with units in Python. One of the > options, was the units package included in Enthought. This had the > issue of being under refactoring at that time. > > The actual situation seems to be that the Enthought package has not > been changed (https://svn.enthought.com/enthought/ticket/1524) because > of some priority issues in that community (very understandable!), but > another interesting package was born from this Enthought discussion: > the "quantities" package: > http://packages.python.org/quantities/ > http://dale.chess.cornell.edu/chess-wiki/Quantities > Thanks for tracking this down. I wondered if it would ever get refactored. What do you think of the Quantities module? I browsed through the documentation and it looked very interesting. On the plus side, it's being actively developed now, which I think sets it apart from any of the other solutions, right? > As I can see, this has already been mentioned in a comment to our trac > ticket, but with no response. > > Honestly, I am not able to understand whether this is good enough to > be included in SAGE, neither I am able of understanding how much > refactoring this would need to make this compatible to all the > wonderful symbolic capabilities of SAGE, but nonetheless I think that > getting something working at least in the numeric domain, could be > very useful > > With this, I'm not proposing this package over others (for example, > Unum looks very mature, but outdated), I'm just asking if one of you > can spend some minutes to review our trac ticket about units of > measurement (#3852), and to take some other decision about it. > Which package do you prefer? I think at this point, someone needs to just make a decision with one of the packages and justify it on sage-devel. Preferably, that person would offer instructions to install the top one or two (or three?) choices so that people could try them out. They would probably also give examples of syntax so others could see (and maybe compare that to the syntax of the other packages). Installation is easy if you are familiar with the command line. Just do: $ sage -sh Then follow whatever instructions the package gives for installation. That will install the package into Sage's python library. Thanks, Jason --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
