Then lets put a stopgap when Sage starts, since Sage has many known bugs but we don't have good ways to check against those inputs (which is worse because the vast majority of these aren't even documented). It's dangerous to use Sage.
Yes I know I'm being slightly ridiculous, but it does hold by your logic. Travis On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 1:34:49 AM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2015-03-05 09:58, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > Could you please share your opinion on whether we should keep or remove > this > > stopgap? > Normally I would say: just write a few lines of code to check the input > conditions and be done with it. That would obviously be the best solution. > > Since this seems to be hard, I tend to agree with the stopgap: it's > dangerous to use that function, so it's good that users are warned. > > As suggested in the ticket, a partial solution would be to check for > certain "known good" cases, and don't display the stopgap in those cases. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
