On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Toon Verstraelen <toon.verstrae...@ugent.be> wrote: > Ondrej Certik wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Aaron S. Meurer <asmeu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> I am testing your branch now. I also left some comments on your github. >>> >>> Does the test_sage patch require sage to test? If it does, I won't be >>> able to review that one, as I don't have sage installed. >> >> It does. Seems like noone was able to test this, but it works for me, >> so if you are ok as long as sympy is involved, I'll just push it in. >> >> Ondrej >> > > I just wonder if we should mark the failing tests in test_complex and > test_functions as xfail until there is a sage version (widely adopted) that > fixes the corresponding bugs? I understand that the bugs are not due to > sympy, but still. If someone just runs the sympy tests and happens to have > sage installed, he/she will get two failing tests.
Honestly, I wouldn't worry about this. I prefer the tests to fail, as they are a simple indicator for anyone to see if Sage is fixed or not. It's not something that we can control much, besides sending the patches to it, which I did (but Sage itself needs an updated sympy package, which I didn't submit yet). Once Sage is fixed, they nothing has to be modified in sympy. Those test_external tests are a bit special. Imho. Ondrej -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy-patches" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy-patc...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy-patches+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy-patches?hl=en.
