Hi Ralf,
On 2017-07-12, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> Just to emphasize that there are different ways to work with patches, I am
> using patchfiles exclusively, always piping the diff into a text file and
> editing that. It's quite easy, just don't change hunk headers.
Actually I still miss the old sa
Hi Erik,
On 2017-07-11, Erik Bray wrote:
> cherry-pick basically does exactly that. If a patch doesn't apply
> with cherry-pick it will give you the opportunity to resolve the merge
> conflict manually, which you'll probably have to do no matter what in
> most cases.
Sure. The point is that wit
Hi Ralf,
On 2017-07-11, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> If it is only a small difference to just one file on another (diverged)
> branch, then why not simply create a patch and apply it to the right branch.
That's what I eventually did. However, I think it would be good to know
whether one can do without
On 2017-07-11, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> On 2017-07-11 14:39, Simon King wrote:
>> Being on a different git branch, I tried
>>git cherry-pick xyz
>
> Why cherry-pick and not simply
> git merge xyz
> ? This could git help finding a proper merge base.
Because I did
On 2017-07-11, Simon King wrote:
> Being on a different git branch, I tried
>git cherry-pick xyz
Could a different strategy help? When I did
git cherry-pick --strategy=recursive -X theirs xyz
I actually got no conflict at all.
But there *should* be a conflict here! After al
Dear all,
sorry to ask a (probably stupid) question on git here, but my question arose
from trying to do SageMath development.
I have a commit xyz with a very small changeset: It modifies a single line
in a single file my_file.
Being on a different git branch, I tried
git cherry-pick xyz
whic
Hi Vincent,
On 2017-07-11, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> These are left over from previous Sage version. They are *not* installed
> by the cypari2 package.
>
> You can safely remove them.
Thank you!
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Hi,
On 2017-07-10, mmarco wrote:
> It is surprising the difference between singular and Sage, considering that
> Sage mostly relies on Singular for multivariate polynomial arithmetic.
Note that Singular is optimised for Gröbner basis computations, but certainly
not optimised for fast arithmetic
Hi!
There are two files that are autogenerated by pari:
src/sage/libs/cypari2/auto_gen.pxi und src/sage/libs/cypari2/auto_instance.pxi
Is it really allowed that installing a package modifies the Sage source tree?
If it is allowed: Should such files then not be git-ignored?
Is there a ticket for
Hi Jeroen,
On 2017-07-10, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> I don't think that it should be so strict. Of course, the optional
> module should still be within the scope of Sage and be sufficiently
> related to things that Sage does.
That would indeed be the case.
> Keep in mind that there are advantage
Hi Jeroen,
On 2017-07-07, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2017-07-07 13:24, Simon King wrote:
>> However I was told that the plan to add optional extension modules will not
>> be supported.
>
> Who has said this? We do currently have several optional extension
> mod
On 2017-07-06, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> There is also Simon's package about group cohomology, with an upgrade still
> in the works IIRC.
Yes. At some point I had the plan to make a separate new-style package for the
C-code of my spkg,
put the GAP- and Singular-code of my spkg into an appropriate
Hi,
On 2017-05-27, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Personally, I find it more intuitive if "sage -i PKGNAME" would
> unconditionally install the Sage package PKGNAME, even if PKGNAME was
> detected as system package.
I find it more intuitive if "sage -f PKGNAME" would install the Sage package
even whe
Hi Jori,
On 2017-05-26, Jori =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=E4ntysalo?= wrote:
> This was done in ~10 bigger ticket and another ~10 with small
> modifications. As an example see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21861
>
> Hence the ticket system would be wrong place for this. For something like
> this we shou
Hi!
On 2017-05-26, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> To continue the heritage, the authors should be supported and encouraged by
> the system to make writing a short note for highlights not a burden but a
> voluntary work motivated by desires to show off his or her work.
Perhaps it would be possible to hav
X on itself
-1 in combination with G3. Namely, in G3 you want that the one-line
description does not specify the output clearly, and in G4 you want
that a more-than-one-line description of the output is missing as
well. And that would be desastrous.
On 2017-05-17, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> We do a p
+1
On 2017-05-18, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I prepared H3 revised from G3 based on your ideas and wishes. It was hard
> to make a compromise from your differing opinions and reach a proposal for
> the better. So this time* if I fail to get approval from most of you, the
> guideline will be
+1
On 2017-05-18, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I prepared H5 revised from G5 based on your ideas and wishes. It was hard
> to make a compromise from your differing opinions and reach a proposal for
> the better. So this time* if I fail to get approval from most of you, the
> guideline will be
+1
Here I like that the typesetting is uniform and does not distinguish
between functions with a single return type and functions with multiple
return types.
On 2017-05-17, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> We do a poll for adopting an official guideline for docstrings (see
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticke
Almost +1
Actually I thought this guideline has already been used, with
a minute difference:
- ``n`` -- integer (default 1), the number of repetitions
(so, "default" instead of "default:" and ")," instead of ");",
since "path connected" punctuation marks are better than disconnected
ones.
Act
X
I still cannot give a clear +1 or -1 to the current suggestion, as
it goes into the right direction but isn't flexible enough.
I'd rather suggest:
H2.
Write "if the lattice is reflexive" unless a technical expression
such as "if ``self`` is reflexive" is more easy to understand.
It reall
+1
On 2017-05-18, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I prepared H4 revised from G4 based on your ideas and wishes. It was hard
> to make a compromise from your differing opinions and reach a proposal for
> the better. So this time* if I fail to get approval from most of you, the
> guideline will be
PS, to the +1 given earlier: I suggest that one should also write `f(x)`
instead of f(x).
On 2017-05-18, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I prepared H1 revised from G1 based on your ideas and wishes. It was hard
> to make a compromise from your differing opinions and reach a proposal for
> the bett
+1
On 2017-05-18, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I prepared H1 revised from G1 based on your ideas and wishes. It was hard
> to make a compromise from your differing opinions and reach a proposal for
> the better. So this time* if I fail to get approval from most of you, the
> guideline will be
-1, and very strongly -1.
Reason:
On 2017-05-17, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> G3. Write (1)
>
> Return True if the lattice is reflexive.
This leaves open what the function returns if it is not reflexive.
None? False? A certificate that proves that it isn't reflexive?
> but do not write (2)
>
> Return
X
In some context, the technical term ``self`` might be easier to
understand (for someone who knows python...) than natural language,
in other context it may be the other way around
Maybe +1 as a rule of thumb, but -1 as a strict rule.
On 2017-05-17, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> We do a poll for adopt
-1, for reasons that have already been explained by others. Generally,
any reference to a programmatical object should be typographically
distinguished from normal text. Hence, it should be
"Let `f(x)` be the function that returns ``True`` if `x>0` and
``False`` otherwise."
but not
"L
Hi!
On 2017-05-08, Thierry wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0700, Volker Braun wrote:
> The behaviour of this example comes from the fact that at this point 0.1
> is still a RealLiteral (hence kind of exact until it gets a precision),
Is it? I thought 0.1 is not exact, whereas 1/10 i
Hi Mark,
On 2017-04-23, markiopp...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...
> https://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/thematic_tutorials/structures_in_coding_theory.html
>
> *Problem 1*
> The constructor for the repetition code in repetition_code.py uses GF(2).
> In order to avoid Error 1 (below) I needed to add the fo
On 2017-04-21, Jori Mantysalo wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>
>> I propose to move the AUTHORS section to the last of the heading:
>
> +1.
Question: Do you suggest to *manually* move the AUTHORS: section of
*all* affected docstrings? Or do you merely suggest to modify Sage's
do
Hi!
On 2017-03-15, kcrisman wrote:
>> Now that we are in the process of having a proper interface to polymake
>> (see [1] thanks to Simon) I would propose to move the package polymake
>> from experimental to optional. For those who don't know, polymake is a
>> CAS focused on polytopes (and tor
On 2017-03-16, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> The author of 1234 has IMO the responsibility to monitor 987 and do timely
> updates of 1234 when 987 changes, including canceling the positive flag on
> 1234.
+1
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" gr
Hi Michael,
On 2017-03-15, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> It's possible, but asking for trouble. If 1234 depends on 987, then it's
> possible that the reviewer in 987 could say "I don't like any of this,
> throw it out and start over," after which the fix in 987 might not look
> anything like what you
Hi!
Vincent Delecroix and I are recalling different advices concerning
"how to review a ticket that has dependencies". Since I think the
question is important, I'd like to get a clarification of our
policy.
Assume there is ticket 1234 that depends on ticket 987. Moreover,
assume that 987 needs wo
On 2017-03-14, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
> No objections from me. Although we might want to try and improve the
> configure script before we make it optional if it can fail without helpful
> error messages.
Of course I'd be glad if polymake became optional. However, I don't know
how to let insta
Hi Jeroen,
On 2017-03-01, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> What about _latex_? Would you plan to change that, too? Sage objects and
>> elements have lots of single-underscore methods, like _repr_, _mul_, etc.
>
> Well, I would put _latex_ in the same basket as _pari_.
> But _repr_ and _mul_ are different
On 2017-02-26, Volker Braun wrote:
> There are comments in the code about that, do they not answer your question?
The tickets do not explain why it is done unconditionally for all
interfaces.
So, I guess when implementing a polymake pexpect interface, I'm going to
add an attribute to the interfa
Hi!
Trying to create a pexpect interface to Polymake, I came accross the
following problem:
In sage.interfaces.expect.Expect._start, there are two environment
variables that are removed before spawning: 'TERM' and 'COLUMNS'.
Why is that?
The problem is that Polymake won't start unless TERM is d
That was quick!
Am Freitag, 24. Februar 2017 21:03:12 UTC+1 schrieb Simon King:
>
>
> I'll try again now.
>
>
The previous attempt took about an hour before it failed. Now, it went a
lot faster, didn't report an error, and I could do the first few examples
from the poly
Am Freitag, 24. Februar 2017 20:46:59 UTC+1 schrieb vdelecroix:
>
> On 24/02/2017 20:44, Simon King wrote:
> > WARNING: Please install/check the following perl modules prior to
> starting polymake:
> >XML::Writer, XML::LibXSLT
>
> You are missing som
Hi Vincent,
On 2017-02-24, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am reporting an error while installing the package
> perl_term_readline_gnu on Sage 7.6.beta4. The package is a dependency
> of polymake. The log is attached and the following error message appears
On 2017-02-24, Simon King wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On 2017-02-24, Simon King wrote:
>> However, I got an error, apparently when trying to install a dependency:
>> [perl_term_readline_gnu-1.34] Could not find neither libtermcap.a,
>> libncurses.a, or libcurses.
>> [pe
Hi!
On 2017-02-24, Simon King wrote:
> However, I got an error, apparently when trying to install a dependency:
> [perl_term_readline_gnu-1.34] Could not find neither libtermcap.a,
> libncurses.a, or libcurses.
> [perl_term_readline_gnu-1.34] make[2]: Entering directory
> '
Hi!
In preparation of next week's Sage Days, I try to install the
experimental polymake package.
However, I got an error, apparently when trying to install a dependency:
[perl_term_readline_gnu-1.34] Could not find neither libtermcap.a,
libncurses.a, or libcurses.
[perl_term_readline_gnu-1.34] m
Hi,
On 2017-02-20, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> On 2017-02-19 17:57, rjf wrote:
>> It might be comparing the real parts. What did you expect? Perhaps
>> Error "<" requires that both operands be members of the same ordered
>> field ??
>> Or perhaps just
>> False
>
> I, for sure, did not expect "True".
Hi Matthew!
On 2017-02-16, Matthew Macauley wrote:
> Seth Sullivant suggested that it's due to a roundoff error, because it
> works with fields such as "QQ" or "GF(3)", etc. That said, I am 99% sure
> that it's a relatively new error, because I have typed in those exact lines
> in previous sem
Hi Johan,
On 2017-02-06, Johan S H Rosenkilde wrote:
> Under the Documentation main page doc.sagemath.org, the "guided tour" is
> called "tutorial". And it is listed after "Thematic Tutorial" though it
> should surely be visited first by a newcomer.
And shouldn't it rather be "Thematic Tutoria
Hi!
On 2017-02-06, Clemens Heuberger wrote:
> Am 2017-02-05 um 03:22 schrieb kcrisman:
>>
>> "Tutorial", "Thematic Tutorial", "PREP Tutorial", "A Tour of Sage". and
>> "Constructions" are mostly the same Tutorial.
>>
>>
>> Just for clarification, these are massively and completely dif
Hi Matthew,
On 2017-02-03, Matthew Rennekamp wrote:
> So, first would be the wiki. Since it is a Wiki, it is editable by anyone-
> though it should *not contain to-do lists/discussions* like it has.
Why not? Although I'd agree that a to-do list should better be a metaticket
on Trac, and discus
On 2017-01-16, David Roe wrote:
> I don't think anyone's arguing that a changelog is a bad idea. The question
> is just whether it's easier to make from fragments in the repository or
> from a new field on trac. Personally I think trac,
+1.
I know that some people believe it is old fashioned, bu
On 2017-01-12, Volker Braun wrote:
> Yes, to the Sage src tree. That is, we would add a newsfragments directory
> somewhere under $SAGE_ROOT.
Seriously???
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop r
Hi Volker,
On 2017-01-11, Volker Braun wrote:
> There is a somewhat painless approach to generating human-readable release
> notes using https://github.com/hawkowl/towncrier. As far as the ticket
> author is concerned, if you think that your ticket #12435 is of wider
> interest and should be a
Hi Daniel,
thanks!
Best regards,
Simon
On 2017-01-09, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> On 2017-01-09 13:27, Simon King wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> My aim is to delete all those branches in my local git tree that are
>> merged in a specific branch, say, in "develop". I know
Hi!
My aim is to delete all those branches in my local git tree that are
merged in a specific branch, say, in "develop". I know that I can list
those branches by "git branch --merged develop" and that I can delete
branches by "git branch -d to_be_deleted".
However, I lack experience in bash. So, I
Hi!
On 2016-12-19, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> I see "==/!=" more as programming tools, and expect that they do not
> attempt to do difficult mathematical comparison that can lead to long
> computation or results other than True or False.
I could be mistaken, but I think what you describe is what cmp
PS:
On 2016-12-03, Pierre wrote:
> I thought about multiplying large matrices, but I'm afraid that completely
> different algorithms/libraries will be used depending on the parent ring
Yes, this would measure the efficiency of matrix arithmetics but would
give no real clue about the efficiency
Hi Pierre,
On 2016-12-03, Pierre wrote:
> We are talking about very basic advice to give to a beginner, and so, I
> knew enough to say that well, C ints (so I guess numpy.int's) will be fast,
> but limited in size, and elements of ZZ can be as large as your memory
> allows etc (and a similar,
PS:
On 2016-11-23, Simon King wrote:
> Hence, if you want a polynomial ring over QQ that has the same algebraic
> relations as a boolean polynomial ring, you could do
>
> sage: B. = BooleanPolynomialRing()
> sage: B.defining_ideal().ring().change_ring(QQ).quo(B
Hi,
On 2016-11-22, Rusydi H. Makarim wrote:
>> Shouldn't it raise an error as soon as the "new" base ring is different
>> from GF(2)?
>>
>
> I don't see any reason why this should not be allowed in the case of
> BooleanPolynomialRing.
Because a BooleanPolynomialRing is defined to be a ring over
Hi,
On 2016-11-21, Rusydi H. Makarim wrote:
> But I argue that a proper behaviour of
> change_ring() in BooleanPolynomialRing is to return a BooleanPolynomialRing
> whenever a base_ring is not given in the argument and return multivariate
> polynomial ring otherwise.
Shouldn't it raise an error
Hi Franco,
On 2016-11-15, Franco Saliola wrote:
> I'm wondering whether there is a way to run the doctests of a single
> function.
Would indeed be nice to have. And thank you for pointing out
run_doctests() --- I haven't been aware of it.
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this message because you
Hi Vincent,
On 2016-11-15, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed, __or__ is for the operator |. "or" can not be overridden.
>
> sage: class a(object):
> : def __or__(self, other):
> : return "hello"
> sage: a() or True
><__main__.a object at 0x7f2549683b
Hi Vincent,
sorry for my previous post, as you discussed the example already.
On 2016-11-15, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is still a semantic problem to solve the following
>
> sage: Unknown or False
> False
No. Unknown or False is Unknown.
The shortcuts would be
Hi Vincent,
On 2016-11-15, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Perhaps was the proposal too greedy, so i wonder whether there would be a
>>> possibility to have a trool adding an Unknown to bool that does not
>>> perturb the speed when only True and False are used, and so that
Hi Martin,
On 2016-11-08, 'Martin R' via sage-devel wrote:
> That's actually precisely what I'd like. So, what are metaclass conflicts?
Many classes in Sage have metaclasses, such as: Everything that inherits
from sage.structure.element.Element or from
sage.structure.unique_representation.Uniqu
Hi John,
On 2016-10-27, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>The OOP way would be to have a mix-in class and subclasses for square
>> matrices that implement these methods.
The category's parent_class resp. element_class are such mix-in classes.
>> This would mean setting the Element
>> attribute in
On 2016-10-27, William Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:25 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> On Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 2:11:58 PM UTC-4, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>>
>>> (1) Why should a nonsquare matrix even have an "is_similar" method? Can we
>>> get rid of that? (Same for "determinant" and
Hi John,
On 2016-10-27, John H Palmieri wrote:
> (1) Why should a nonsquare matrix even have an "is_similar" method? Can we
> get rid of that? (Same for "determinant" and some other methods.)
It would be possible using the category framework's "ElementMethods".
x.is_similar(y) makes sense for
On 2016-10-12, Jori =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=E4ntysalo?= wrote:
> So we have now a common view that 'type' in TypeError should (mostly?)
> refer to types in wrong class, wrong category etc; and so for functions
> having no input it should (almost?) never happen.
What about ValueError? After all, in tha
Hi Ted,
On 2016-10-12, Ted Kosan wrote:
> However, PRESS was not specifically designed for use in education, so
> I don't think it would be very useful to include in Sage.
IMHO, most of SageMath isn't about education. So, why do you think its
inclusion wouldn't be useful?
Best regards,
Simon
-
Hi Jeroen,
On 2016-10-07, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-07 13:59, Simon King wrote:
>> That's why I ask here how to do it right...
>
> Well, that's partially why we have
> https://github.com/OpenDreamKit/OpenDreamKit/issues/87
Nice! I see many checkmarks ther
Hi Jeroen,
On 2016-10-07, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> If you want to use autodoc with Cython code, you will probably need
> parts of the Sage docbuilder (and I don't think that ripping this out of
> Sage has even been done).
Well, I did rip it out of sage, in my old-style spkg. But I thought it
wa
Hi!
On 2016-10-07, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-10-07 13:35, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote:
>> The implementation of __hash__ on finite fields claims to be the same as
>> for 'object'.
>
> Could be:
>
> $ sage -c 'print(hash(object()))'
> 8790924175895
> $ sage -c 'print(hash(object()))'
> 8771
Hi!
At https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18514 I am in the process of
upgrading my old-style group cohomology spkg to a more modularised
new-style spkg.
I've put it on "needs info", and perhaps some of you can give me the
information that I need to finish the upgrade.
The branch at #18514 is base
Hi Thierry,
On 2016-09-22, Thierry wrote:
> Yes, though in the first case the (pentium3 emulated) processor is only
> capable of 32 bit (no lm flag), while in the other cases (genuine pentium4
> and genuine core2duo), while the kernel is 32bit, the proc is capable of
> 64bit.
Not sure if that ca
Hi Thierry,
On 2016-09-21, Thierry wrote:
> while trying to build and test Sage Debian Live 7.3, i notice some issue
> with meataxe package.
Thanks for trying!
> While doctests pass on the VM is was built on
> (Pentium3 kvm-emulated), the doctests give a lot of errors when the same
> binary is
Hi!
On 2016-09-12, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> This happened to me. My patch for a ticket passed the doctesting by a
> patchbot A but afterward failed by another patchbot B. The reason was that
> the patchbot B has an optional package installed, and hence ran the
> optional doctests for the installed
Hi Jeroen, hi Leif,
On 2016-09-09, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>>> Obviously yes:
>>>
>>> #include
>>> remove(const char *pathname);
>>
>> For files, unlink().
>
> Depends on what kind of systems you want to support. remove() is C89
> while unlink() is POSIX.
Doing this and removing some other usele
Hi Jeroen,
On 2016-09-09, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> Depends on what kind of systems you want to support. remove() is C89
> while unlink() is POSIX.
Does one of the commands work on all platforms supported by SageMath?
If not: What to do to make it work on all platforms?
Best regards,
Simon
--
Hi Jeroen,
On 2016-09-09, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-09-09 08:23, Simon King wrote:
>> Is there a cleaner/less costly way to remove a file?
>
> Obviously yes:
>
> #include
> remove(const char *pathname);
Nice, thank you!
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this
Hi Leif,
On 2016-09-09, leif wrote:
> No, it's presumably really (in) the C library function system() [1], in
> Python os.system(). (I doubt you abuse it to write to or read from files.)
*I* don't. But it seems that the third party code I'm using does. There,
I see the lines
sprintf(buffer
Hi Nils, hi Leif,
On 2016-09-08, leif wrote:
>> Googling suggests that this might be a part of glibc:
>>
>> https://github.com/lattera/glibc/blob/master/sysdeps/posix/system.c#L52
Aha! Since I expected it to be related with (c)python, I duckduckwent
for "python do_system", but to no avail. Than
Hi!
Trying to profile some code with %crun, I get lots of hits in the
function do_system. However, a function of that name does not appear in
the code. So, what does do_system do, where is it from, and what is
calling it?
Best regards,
Simon
--
You received this message because you are subscrib
Hi Dima,
On 2016-09-06, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> the whole world has basically gone to git nowadays, not only Sage.
> Besides it's not so different from hg.
IMHO, git and hg are "not so different" in the same way as PyObject*
and object are "not so different": They feel totally different (at
leas
Hi!
On 2016-09-01, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
>> Side-question: Would it be SageMath-technically possible that one axiom
>> implies another?
I think so. For example, if you combine the axioms of a division ring
with the "finite" axiom, it implies the "commutative"-axiom:
sage: DivisionRings().Commu
On 2016-09-01, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We should not forbid inheriting from SageObect/Element,
> Parent/CategoryObject in external packages. We should just provide a
> simple way to automatize the recompilation. This is a step toward
> modularization.
Totally +1!
On 2016-09-01, Johan S H Rosenkilde wrote:
> +1 to removing not-very-common categories from global namespace as well.
I agree. Now, as we have the axiom framework, it is very easy to create
a specific category, and there is no need to have CommutativeRings() in
the global namespace when one can
Hi!
Assume that you have a function that does some caching, and the doctests
will only work as expected if the cache is empty initially. Hence, the
execution of the tests in one docstring will affect the execution of the
tests in the other docstrings *in the same file*.
What I want is either of t
Hi Leif,
On 2016-08-28, leif wrote:
> I have to admit I had to try whether this has changed "recently", but
> no, already installed optional / experimental packages still aren't
> reconsidered upon upgrading Sage, i.e., you currently have to explicitly
> "reinstall" them if there's a new version
Hi Leif,
On 2016-08-28, leif wrote:
> Yes and no ;-) -- with "has installed" meaning the passive present form
> (rather "the user somehow has an old version installed", where
> "manually" doesn't really make sense though).
I meant: The user did some effort in order to install a version that is
n
Hi William,
On 2016-08-28, William Stein wrote:
> In case you're wondering -- what are "google-style docstrings"?
>
> http://sphinxcontrib-napoleon.readthedocs.io/en/latest/example_google.html
>
> and
>
> https://sphinxcontrib-napoleon.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
>
> It seems to be a cleaner st
Hi Nicolas,
On 2016-08-28, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>>Alternatively:
>>Category of enumerable X
>
> This one would be harder to implement (no different from the more
> natural "Category of enumerated X"), as we would need to do something
> specific for joins with an enumerated set.
If a
Hi Volker,
On 2016-08-28, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 2:30:27 PM UTC+2, Simon King wrote:
>>
>> Thus, the question remains: How to use the doc builder in order to
>> create in SAGE_ROOT/local/share/ the documentation of a pip-installable
>>
Hi Samuel,
On 2016-08-27, Samuel Lelievre wrote:
> Le samedi 27 août 2016 14:40:26 UTC+2, Simon King a écrit :
>
> not really answering your question, but just to mention there are
> some thoughts on this on the wiki page "Code sharing workflow":
>
>
Hi!
It has been a long time since I was considering Sage's doc builder. So,
please allow me to ask, since it is conceivable that I missed recent
developments:
- Assume you have bunch of cython and python files sitting in a folder
that is not part of the SageMath src tree. Think of a pip-install
Hi Kwankyu,
On 2016-08-23, Kwankyu Lee wrote:
> For (1): Joining categories works. However, this seems not a standard nor
> an elegant way...
Why not? It is absolutely standard in mathematics to consider objects A
that belong to the category of rings and belong at the same time to the
category
Hey!
On 2016-08-19, leif wrote:
> Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> What is the recommended way to check if the latest version of a given
>> Sage package is installed? The function is_package_installed() only
>> checks whether *some* version of the package is installed, which might
>> not be the latest ve
Hi Jeroen,
On 2016-08-18, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-08-18 16:43, Simon King wrote:
>> What do you mean by Singular interface?
>
> If I understand correctly, your package has an interface for GAP,
> Singular and Sage and these are all independent from eachother.
In th
Hi Dima,
On 2016-08-18, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Anyway, I guess it depends upon how much GAP code you have. If its hundreds
> of lines it's probably nicer to put them into a file.
It is about 1500 lines, currently in three files.
Cheers,
Simon
--
You received this message because you are sub
Hi Jeroen,
On 2016-08-18, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-08-18 11:22, Simon King wrote:
>> What are you talking about? The current optional Sage package "meataxe"
>> is the latest upstream from Aachen.
>
> I was under the impression that you needed special
401 - 500 of 2838 matches
Mail list logo
