On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Volker Braun <vbraun.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, April 5, 2011 8:13:17 AM UTC-4, Bill Hart wrote: >> >> Ah, it seems that you do not actually want expert mathematicians who >> are not expert coders to contribute code to Sage. > > You are missing the point of this thread; its not at all about Mike R > tripping over one of the numerous C++ pitfalls. I don't doubt that his > program is great at what it does, and its awesome that he shares it with > us. > The issue is what I see as a failure of the Sage review process where some > code that doesn't seem to be ready for public consumption was shoehorned > into a library.
There was no Sage review process when lcalc was added (by me) to Sage. At the time (2005?) I did not know that Sage would grow beyond just being a number theory system used mostly by me. A new substantial upstream library that has tons of issues should definitely not be added to Sage today, and I don't think any such thing has happened since 2007 when we enacted a voting/review process for package inclusion. > Ideally, one of the Sage developers who works in that field > would team up with the upstream author and polish lcalc. This would be both > a service to Sage and the mathematical community. +1 That would be great, and I'm very much looking forward to it happening. Mike is normally at Univ of Waterloo, which has an extremely strong CS program and CS students, so this could perhaps be a student project sometime in the future. Perhaps this thread will provide some motivation for such a project. -- William -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
