On 17 Jul., 00:36, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That said, I *do* think it is a good idea to considering getting
> Frobby into standard Sage, simply because it provides much new
> optimized functionality. That said -- I want to ask a question of
> people who are voting +1 to this proposal: have you ever used Frobby's
> capabilities? Do you expect to ever use them? Do you know people who
> will?
>
>
Hi William,
let me answer these questions of yours.
I didn't use yet the functionality Frobby provides, apart from "toying
a bit around", and I do not expect to use it seriously (although in
number theory, one never knows ...). I also know only Bjarke (the
author) himself as a one to use it. That said, I still vote +1! Bjarke
has made a very good case w.r.t. the functionality in light of the
"inclusion procedure" noted somewhere (in the Wiki? on the Web site?
in the docu? I always mix these up.). And "formally", he's gone more
than 90% of the way, and has a good pace.
What is more, I see the "Frobby migrates to Sage" story as a success
story, both the Frobby project and the Sage project might be proud of.
Cheers,
Georg
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
