I remarked that there is a limit in the number of tickets client
patchbots gets (the limit is 1000). Could you also remove this limit?
Vincent
On 02/03/2017 19:56, Frédéric Chapoton wrote:
Hello,
I have worked on the patchbot, and the latest version (2.6.8) also checks
that a ticket is not
Hello,
I have worked on the patchbot, and the latest version (2.6.8) also checks
that a ticket is not closed on trac before testing it. This should prevent
the bad behaviour that you observed. There remains an issue about latency
(tickets not being tested), which I do not understand.
Frederic
On 2017-03-02 14:19, Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
(4) __pari__(): consistent with Python (__int__, __str__) and NumPy
(__array__). However, creating such names possibly goes against the
Python documentation [2].
Why "possibly"? The way I understand [2] is that __names__ are
Working on it
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22493
On 01/03/2017 13:06, 'Bill Hart' via sage-devel wrote:
Hi all,
We have just released MPIR-3.0.0.
http://mpir.org/
Note that you now need to have the latest yasm to build MPIR.
http://yasm.tortall.net/
To build yasm, download the
I feel like we should also put this in the context of other package
conversions in Sage. We also do _foo_ for any of the others, e.g.,
_maxima_, _singular_, etc. So I think whatever we do for pari, we should do
for the others. I agree with Jeroen that a deprecation accompanying this
change
Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> (4) __pari__(): consistent with Python (__int__, __str__) and NumPy
> (__array__). However, creating such names possibly goes against the
> Python documentation [2].
Why "possibly"? The way I understand [2] is that __names__ are reserved
for use by the Python interpreter
Hi,
In the ticket of Laplace transform (see trac ticket #22422) I have the same
dilemma. One could:
1- do nothing (keeping the same behaviour as, say, `symbolic_sum`),
expecting that the user asks for inline help, figures out there is an
'algorithm' argument that can be changed, and tries
Opening a ticket for bugs is always a good idea.
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 11:11:41 AM UTC+1, Peleg Michaeli wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have two questions, one might be thought of as a bug report / feature
> request, please tell me what you think. Trying
> integrate(x, x, 0, infinity)
> raises
