> I'm going to guess you have an eval() somewhere in there for this to > work. If not, just ignore the rest of this message and send me the > patch for ipython itself :)
No, there's an eval. In the context of SAGE, the eval is more useful than the (defensible, correct) IPython behaviour. > It's worth mentioning that I removed this very functionality from > ipython a long time ago, precisely because... > >> Does what you'd expect, even if it will mangle iterators in strange >> corner cases. > > of this. After a few very puzzled users who lost quite a bit of time > tracking down a problem caused by this, I decided to more or less > eliminate all eval()s from ipython during the introspection phases. > Today, if %autocall is off, no silent evals can ever happen, and even > with autocall on, they are avoided if at all possible. > > Just a comment, you guys decide how to patch/fork your own versions as > you best see fit, of course. I certainly don't want to fork, and I don't like the idea of patching; all SAGE changes work by redefining internal IPython functions at runtime. Oh, if only Python had a good advice system, like most lisps. Nick PS. There is nothing SAGE specific to this apropos module; should it be folded into IPython? It is quite tuned; it crawls the SAGE namespace in at most two seconds on my ancient laptop. It does require Pyrex -- introspection is just too slow to do in pure Python. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
