[sage-support] Re: Doc-testing cdef'd methods

2008-12-02 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On Dec 1, 2008, at 10:52 AM, Craig Citro wrote: Question for all: is there a good reason for writing cdef functions? Or should we make all cython functions cpdef? Python convention seems to be to expose the internals of the class, but just mark (with _ or __) the functions that are

[sage-support] Re: Doc-testing cdef'd methods

2008-12-01 Thread Jason Grout
Simon King wrote: Dear Robert, On Nov 29, 7:43 pm, Robert Bradshaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can't call cdef functions from the Python interpreter. You can write a test function, e.g. _test_mulint. Good idea! On the other hand, after writing I wouldn't like to make the method

[sage-support] Re: Doc-testing cdef'd methods

2008-12-01 Thread Craig Citro
Question for all: is there a good reason for writing cdef functions? Or should we make all cython functions cpdef? Python convention seems to be to expose the internals of the class, but just mark (with _ or __) the functions that are considered internal and may change without warning.

[sage-support] Re: Doc-testing cdef'd methods

2008-11-29 Thread Robert Bradshaw
On Nov 29, 2008, at 9:01 AM, Simon King wrote: Dear Sage supporters, sorry if this is the wrong list. I have some cdefined methods of an extension class. How can I doc-test them? In more detail, having the following method definition of an extension class MTX, the doc test would fail

[sage-support] Re: Doc-testing cdef'd methods

2008-11-29 Thread Simon King
Dear Robert, On Nov 29, 7:43 pm, Robert Bradshaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can't call cdef functions from the Python interpreter. You can   write a test function, e.g. _test_mulint. Good idea! On the other hand, after writing I wouldn't like to make the method public, I asked myself *why*