On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Ezra Miller<e...@math.duke.edu> wrote: > For what it's worth, I agree with your analysis, William. > Ezra > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Ezra Miller > Mathematics Department (919) 660-2846 > Duke University, Box 90320 e...@math.duke.edu > Durham, NC 27708-0320 http://math.duke.edu/~ezra > --------------------------------------------------------- > > On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, William Stein wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, gsw wrote: >> >> > 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 >> >> I think there are almost no current Sage users that would use >> the functionality of Frobby. However, my grad school >> roommate (Ezra Miller) did a Ph.D. on Alexander duality for >> monomial ideals (something very much related to Frobby), so I >> learned a bit about it, and that there is a whole community >> for which this sort of computational capability is very >> important. This community has not switched over to Sage yet, >> but getting Frobby into Sage is a very good step in the right >> direction to making Sage more useful to them. >> >> So I vote +1 to inclusion of Frobby in Sage, modulo having >> the issues that have been discussed in this thread being >> sorted out (e.g., Solaris support). >> >> -- William >> >> > 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 >> > >
-- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
