> 4. The scipy dev team is currently having a thread about setting up a
> snippet web database for scipy. It's just in the planning stages now; maybe
> we could work together with them on a system we both could use.
That was a long thread! Let me sum it up: Many people liked gist, but
many others
On Nov 10, 11:45 am, pang wrote:
> I searched for "wikiinteract" on trac, and came up with patches with
> no testing at all: 9737, 9729, 9728 and 9623. I couldn't find an
> example that is nicely tested.
On second thought, these are not trivial to split and test. Roughly
every line consists of on
> This is what has happened already I think, and is why
> progress has been so glacial with moving wiki interacts into the
> library -- it's much
> harder work than doing it in a way without any testing.
I searched for "wiki interact" on trac, and came up with patches with
no testing at all: 9
On 9 nov, 21:24, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Jason Grout
>
>
>
> Something being tedious is not a reason not to do it.
But it may be a good reason not to recommend others to do it. Moving
interacts from the wiki into the library is encouraged in the
developing for Sage
On 9 nov, 21:24, William Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Jason Grout
>
>
>
> Something being tedious is not a reason not to do it.
But it may be a good reason not to recommend others to do it. Moving
interacts from the wiki into the library is encouraged in the
developing for Sage
On 11/9/10 2:24 PM, William Stein wrote:
Your two options are sort of orthogonal. Personally I think we should have:
(a) a library of high quality stable tested working interacts that
are included in the Sage library,
(b) many interacts that are of varying quality that users post somewh
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> On 11/9/10 1:14 PM, Pablo Angulo wrote:
>>
>> I see there are some trac tickets for moving interacts from the wiki
>> into the Sage library (at least 9623, ). However, none of them have unit
>> tests. I though that automated checking of the c
On 11/9/10 1:14 PM, Pablo Angulo wrote:
I see there are some trac tickets for moving interacts from the wiki
into the Sage library (at least 9623, ). However, none of them have unit
tests. I though that automated checking of the code was the main reason
for moving the interacts into the librar
