Hi Martin, On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 13:15:51 +0100 Martin Albrecht <martinralbre...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be easier to include the Cython interface in the > > package? AFAIK, Cython's build system improved significantly and > > there is no reason to use Sage's build system for a Cython module. > > my understanding is that Charles was more specifically asking about > including his experimental package in the reference manual. My > understanding is that this is currently not possible. Aaah.. thanks for the pointer. When I read his message, having to rerun "sage -b" to get the relevant code seemed more problematic than not being able to access the documentation. I guess I am used to reading the code for documentation. I don't mind if something is not in the reference manual. This is orthogonal to my main point though: I think wrappers for optional packages should live in the package and not the Sage library. I know this goes against the popular general philosophy of "Sage development can be streamlined by bringing everything under one roof." I believe the Sage project would benefit more if we stop trying to make research code and a stable library interface fit into the same package and encourage people to build on Sage while we concentrate on creating a rock solid python library with an intuitive interface for generally useful mathematics functionality. Cheers, Burcin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. 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. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
