Oh, I see. It would be nice if Sage was more modular. Good luck with Qsnake! On Jul 22, 7:51 pm, Ondřej Čertík <ondrej.cer...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:19 PM, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Eviatar <eviatarb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Just out of curiosity: why are you forking a separate project instead > >> of developing Sage? > > > I think the main issue is that Sage contains a lot of dependencies and > > code that are not needed for people doing Finite Element Method (say) > > work. But nonetheless, there are useful ideas in how Sage is > > constructed, which Ondrej's project also benefits from. > > Also so that we can quickly release a new version, update a package > and so on. Also, what I did in Qsnake is that I wrote a completely > new build system (in pure Python, as one simple file) and also I have > added a lot of new packages, not in standard Sage. > By doing it separately, I can simply create a version, that "just > works". Plus I wanted to use git and github etc., as these tools make > me a lot more productive (subjective reason). > > In any case, I have strictly stayed with the SPKG packages, so that > any improvements (let's say after my new packages mature) can be > incorporated in standard Sage, eventually. > > So I view it as simply organizing the work, rather than a competing fork. > > > > > As a related example, shortly after I started Sage (in 2005), Ondrej > > started Sympy (in 2006), which does symbolic calculus. At least for > > a while, much of what Sympy did, one could do more quickly in Sage. > > That said, I just went to the app store recently and downloaded a > > program called PythonMath, which I find handy on occasion: it turns > > out PythonMath is basically Python + Sympy, which is _vastly_ easier > > to port to the iPhone than Sage. > > Yes. For the kind of math that I do, in daily research (electronic > structure calculations and other quantum mechanics stuff), sympy > always worked great, and having no other depenencies than Python, it > was exactly what I always needed. For the kind of math that William > does, Sage has always worked much better. Also, sympy is just a > symbolic library (and that's it, so one has to use other libraries for > plotting, numerics, notebook...), while Sage is everything. > > And thus the motivation for Qsnake --- to have a program, that > contains everything and "just works". I would put Qsnake on the same > level as psage:http://purple.sagemath.org/, if I understand the > motivation of psage correctly, it's aim is also to eventually > integrate the useful packages (once they mature from "research" to > "production") into Sage. Looking here: > > http://purple.sagemath.org/goals.html > > That's pretty much the same motivation for Qsnake. Except that I need > a different set of packages (and I need Fortran). > > Ideally, there would be a huge repository of SPKG packages (just like > the huge repository that Ubuntu has, with almost everything), and one > could quickly install just what one needs. So I am trying to figure > this out too with Qsnake. But it's easier said than done. > > Ondrej
-- 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
