On Sep 3, 2010, at 4:21 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > Hi, > > I have pushed this in, so the blame goes to my head. Some comments: > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Christian Muise > <christian.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> This is indeed very strange. According to issue 2046 (and my own >>> bisecting as well) it comes from this commit: >>> >>> commit dcbc2da31324e98c9cb3a4bf17c50f029774ae06 >>> Author: Sebastian Krämer <basti...@gmail.com> >>> Date: Wed May 5 22:48:18 2010 +0200 >>> >>> Implement fast atomic substitution. >>> >>> * The main code is in Basic._subs_dict >>> * It is used automatically by subs when possible. >>> * Where the default substitution is not good enough this method is >>> overridden. >>> * Because of hashing problems (different hash although equal) one >>> example in the modules documentation has to be changed. >>> * This commit only couples it very loose to subs. By rewriting subs a >>> little and integrating it better there will be some more speed >>> improvement. >> >> It looks like the pull into the main repo (sympy/sympy/master) did some >> wonky things. Attached is a view of gitk from my local master. Maybe a > > No, it was there in your pull request, I remember it, and you can > still check it easily here: > > http://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/2 > > I thought it was somehow needed for your branch, and also you wrote > there (feel free to go on that link to check it): > > """ > As per discussion 0 this branch, containing the modifications over the > summer for Google's SoC program, is ready to be merged in. A number of > iterations has already gone into getting it up to shape, but I'm open > to more suggestions if there are any. > > Thanks. Cheers > """ > > So I somehow believed the branch is ok to go in. Which is my fault, > and I apologize. Next time I'll wait to get approvals from the > reviewers too, so that they can say +1 or -1 to the final branch going > in.
Maybe we should have some rule that requires more than one reviewer to sign off for large branches such as this one. > > Aaron, can you please revert that patch? I already fixed everything earlier today. I actually screwed up myself because I didn't realize that SymTuple was moved to the core, so I had to partially revert my reversion. But everything should be good now, at least with respect to that (unless some other commit snuck in there). Aaron Meurer > > Otherwise, I think that all is ok. > > Ondrej > > P.S. Aaron and Christian, can you please link your gsoc reports here: > > http://code.google.com/p/sympy/wiki/GSoC2010 > > I'd appreciate it. :) -- 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.
