Ok, thanks for the feedback. This isn't a high priority right now, but it was just one my mind at the moment so I wanted to put the idea out there. I'll plan to split it out to a stand-alone package when I get there (probably it will be one of the last things to do before we can claim full Python 3 support).
On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 7:11 PM Dima Pasechnik <dimp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 from me too. > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 6:08 PM Matthias Koeppe > <matthiaskoe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +1 on splitting it out as a standalone Python package. With a bit of luck, > > a new set of contributors for it can be found that way. > > > > On Friday, September 21, 2018 at 11:06:47 AM UTC-4, Erik Bray wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 4:29 PM Nils Bruin <nbr...@sfu.ca> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Friday, September 21, 2018 at 1:46:47 AM UTC-7, Erik Bray wrote: > >> >> > >> >> There is a cool module in sage called sage.misc.explain_pickle, which > >> >> is useful for helping to understand and debug how non-trivial objects > >> >> in Sage are pickled and unpickled. > >> >> > >> > I am adding another testimonial on the usefulness of the routine. On > >> > several occasions I was in a pickle (sorry for the pun), which could be > >> > solved immediately by explain_pickle. it was a big time-saver that it > >> > was available *right there*, because I wasn't looking forward to having > >> > to hunt down a third party package that may or may not help me. I also > >> > think that with multiprocessing, serialization remains very important to > >> > support for (hopefully) all data structures in sage. That means that > >> > whenever a new structure pops up, errors and debugging will be > >> > inevitable. The problems in serialization are often triggered by > >> > non-local interactions, so I would not expect that problems with > >> > serialization in sage will become rarer (in fact, I expect them to > >> > become more complex due to more intricate interactions). > >> > > >> > I would be a little sad to see explain_pickle go. > >> > >> Per my reply to Jeroen, what if it were still "there" in > >> sage.misc.explain_pickle, but the meat of it were moved out to a > >> separate module (which could still be included in > >> sage-the-distribution, as at least an optional package if not a > >> standard package)? > >> > >> My reasoning here is not so much that it isn't useful (which I think > >> it clearly is), but rather that it's a pretty general tool that > >> deserves to live outside Sage. And it's also in need of maintenance, > >> which eventually will make it a blocker for Sage, which is not so good > >> given that it can clearly exist outside of Sage itself. > > > > -- > > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
