Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-26 Thread Jori Mäntysalo
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: But numbers 2-1 does not seem so strong base for decision. Sure, but that is because it is such a specific question about Posets. True. But there have been some more general discussions, and I think that even those have not had that many people.

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Jori Mäntysalo
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: I actually think that it's a very good thing if reviewers point out flaws and give constructive suggestions. I wish all my tickets had that... Pointing out clear flaws is the reason to have reviewers at all. Constructive suggestions are good thing.

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2016-01-25 14:47, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: But numbers 2-1 does not seem so strong base for decision. Sure, but that is because it is such a specific question about Posets. You cannot expect every Sage developer to have an opinion about Posets. I never used Posets in Sage, so I don't have an

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Jori Mäntysalo
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: But what if -- a slightly artificial example -- I make function A that uses Poset as a wrapper, function B that does not, then Nathann reviews A and Travis reviews B...? In such a case you should try to agree with everybody which of the two

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2016-01-25 13:26, Jori Mäntysalo wrote: But what if -- a slightly artificial example -- I make function A that uses Poset as a wrapper, function B that does not, then Nathann reviews A and Travis reviews B...? In such a case you should try to agree with everybody which of the two

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Nathann Cohen
I'm sorry to insist, but if everybody agreed that I am wrong to dislike a design pattern, that still would not force me to click on "positive review" if I do not want to. Nathann Le 25 janv. 2016 14:47, "Jori Mäntysalo" a écrit : > On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Jeroen Demeyer

[sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Jori Mäntysalo
There was a discussion between I, Travis and Nathann about HasseDiagram-Poset; maybe a year ago there was discussion about 'self' in docstrings. I have made some simple functions to add to Sage. Most of them have been reviewed and accepted. Now, if I ask Nathann to review a function that

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
I actually think that it's a very good thing if reviewers point out flaws and give constructive suggestions. I wish all my tickets had that... Jeroen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

Re: [sage-devel] Developing in general

2016-01-25 Thread Nathann Cohen
Hello Jori, When in front of a patch I do not agree with, the least harmful thing I can do to the author's work is to not review it. Especially when I consider that it is only a matter of taste, and thus do not oppose any positive review given by somebody else to the very same patch. Especially

[sage-devel] Developing a General Relativity package

2011-01-29 Thread Dox
Hi everyone! Nowadays I'm working in some complex supergravity calculations, so I'm much involved into computing GR tensor (Riemann, Ricci and Einstein) as well as Yang-Mills theories. I'd like to help or start to develop a package for manipulate this kind of symbolic manipulation. How should I