This [1] program for computing lines of code seems pretty nice. About
Sage, it says sage-6.4 has 433970 lines of code (in src/sage, so "the sage
library"), with the following breakdown. Does that make sense? It also
says we have 858449 lines of comments in our code files, which if true is a
rat
Hi,
I'd be interesting in co-organizing a Bug Days *in* August 2015 if that's
still allowed, or failing that, May 2015.
Anna
On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 9:34:19 AM UTC-6, William Stein wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Would anybody be interested in helping me to organize a bug days
> workshop sometime
Hi,
I'd be interesting in co-organizing a Bug Days *in* August 2015 if that's
still allowed, or failing that, May 2015.
Anna
On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 9:34:22 AM UTC-6, William wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Would anybody be interested in helping me to organize a bug days
> workshop sometime in th
On Friday, January 9, 2015 at 12:30:16 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, January 9, 2015 at 9:49:52 AM UTC+1, Sebastien Gouezel wrote:
>>
>> The webpage http://trac.sagemath.org/wiki/Cygwin64Port indicates that
>> sage can now be built under cygwin64 almost out of the box. So
Hi!
On 2015-01-11, Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 12:54:56 AM UTC-8, Martin von Gagern wrote:
>>
>> On 11.01.2015 09:38, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> > Hopefully it's becoming stable enough that
>> > we should start shipping it as part of Sage?
>>
>> At first I thought so, too
Hello everybody !
Sorry if this question was already asked (I was not able to find it)
but I wondered how to make link in our doc between documents ?
Like a link from the developer's manual to the 'install Sage' guide,
or from a chapter of 'Tutorials' to a chapter of 'Thematic tutorials'.
It see
Hello everybody !
The "constructions" document is meant to "answer some questions along
the line 'How do I construct ... in Sage?' "
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/constructions/index.html
There is at the end of it a section which seems quite unrelated,
called "Interface Issues":
http://www.sagema
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 12:54:56 AM UTC-8, Martin von Gagern wrote:
>
> On 11.01.2015 09:38, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > Hopefully it's becoming stable enough that
> > we should start shipping it as part of Sage?
>
> At first I thought so, too. But now I'm no longer sure: if you ship it
>
On 11.01.2015 09:38, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> Hopefully it's becoming stable enough that
> we should start shipping it as part of Sage?
At first I thought so, too. But now I'm no longer sure: if you ship it
with Sage, then it will be difficult to use it if you want to work with
a patch from an old
Hello !
> Perhaps we should go through and convert all old tickets for once and
> for all. (Not sure how many wouldn't convert cleanly though...)
Technically, it should be "feasible" to apply those patches to the
release on which they were based (a loong time ago !), and to turn
them into bra
Hello everybody !
I write many documentation patches these days, and try to figure out
how to make our doc easier to read at any entry level.
Here is what our "documentation" contains at the moment (note that the
layout of this page has been improved by Karl-Dieter's ticket #17472):
http://www.sa
+1 to getting rid of the sage dev scripts in favor of git-trac (first
the docs, then altogether). Hopefully it's becoming stable enough that
we should start shipping it as part of Sage?
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1) should we keep the "S
12 matches
Mail list logo
