This stuff is spooky... I've always been treating int and Integer as
interchangeable when coding for Sage. Maybe I've introduced several such
bugs.
Can anyone explain in a noob-friendly way how an implementer should decide
between returning ints and Integers, when it is OK to treat them as
equ
And note that
sage: DyckWords(4r, 2r).cardinality()
9
sage: type(_)
Which might explain part of the behavior.
Vincent
PS: the change certainly comes from #17852 which makes now binomial(3,2)
return a Python int if the first argument is a Python int.
On 18/04/15 01:05, Benjamin Hackl wrote:
Well done! And with the verbose output from #18244 I got
AssertionError: expected a Sage Integer and got 9 of type
which does not help a lot, but still it is some indication
Vincent
On 18/04/15 01:05, Benjamin Hackl wrote:
I take everything back; I have no idea how I passed "make ptestlong"
I take everything back; I have no idea how I passed "make ptestlong"
earlier -- but
the failure is still very much here. I think it can be triggered somewhat
reliably with
./sage -bt src/sage/combinat/dyck_word.py
while at the same time
./sage -t src/sage/combinat/dyck_word.py
passes without
At least I opened #18244...
On 18/04/15 00:02, Benjamin Hackl wrote:
Vincent, did you also upgrade to 6.7.beta0 or 6.7.beta1 from a previous
version?
I just finished building 6.7.beta1 after "make distclean", and this time I
can't reproduce the error.
Unfortunately, this doesn't really explain
On 18/04/15 00:02, Benjamin Hackl wrote:
Vincent, did you also upgrade to 6.7.beta0 or 6.7.beta1 from a previous
version?
I did upgrade.
I just finished building 6.7.beta1 after "make distclean", and this time I
can't reproduce the error.
Unfortunately, this doesn't really explain what happen
Vincent, did you also upgrade to 6.7.beta0 or 6.7.beta1 from a previous
version?
I just finished building 6.7.beta1 after "make distclean", and this time I
can't reproduce the error.
Unfortunately, this doesn't really explain what happened earlier, and there
is still the possibilty that
the er
It's a mistake on my part, sorry!
Martin
Am Freitag, 17. April 2015 23:55:04 UTC+2 schrieb Martin R:
>
> Hi Frederic!
>
> It seems to me that the patchbot 2.3.3 reports itself as patchbot 2.2, is
> this possible or a mistake on my part?
>
> Martin
>
> Am Mittwoch, 15. April 2015 22:55:34 UTC+2 s
Hi Frederic!
It seems to me that the patchbot 2.3.3 reports itself as patchbot 2.2, is
this possible or a mistake on my part?
Martin
Am Mittwoch, 15. April 2015 22:55:34 UTC+2 schrieb Frédéric Chapoton:
>
> Hello,
>
> As I have said before, I have no machine other than my laptop, so I only
> t
Strange. I'm also trying to find out what triggers the error, no success
yet.
Jan Keitel also encountered this error
(http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18237#comment:6)
-- and I'm sure
that there are others with the same problem.
Benjamin
Am Freitag, 17. April 2015 21:17:10 UTC+2 schrieb vdelec
Hello Benjamin,
Indeed, it was after a "make ptestlong" or something similar. And it
reproduced on both sage-6.7.beta0 and sage-6.7.beta1.
The error is very strange since it corresponds to a test of some return
type. I will try to get something more verbose. And there is no caching
involved
On Friday, 17 April 2015 15:13:12 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> this is now #18240
>
needs review now!
>
> On Friday, 17 April 2015 14:57:42 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>
>> bump, this is still not fixed in the MPIR we ship, causing pain and
>> suffering such as here:
>> http://trac.sa
Hi Vincent,
well, at least I'm not the only one. For now, I don't really have a clue
regarding where this could come from.
I'm still compiling a clean version of 6.7.beta1, but now I guess that
won't change much.
The circumstance that this error only seems to appear after a series of
doctests
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:35 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> >
>> > If you ever get tired of raising the issue, maybe you could try doing
>> > something about it.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> I think in this case the defensive is understandable.
>
>>
>> I have done things about the issues with optional packages.
>> Fo
>
> >
> > If you ever get tired of raising the issue, maybe you could try doing
> > something about it.
>
>
>
I think in this case the defensive is understandable.
> I have done things about the issues with optional packages.
> For example, I wrote
>
> https://github.com/sagemathi
> We have lots of doctests but they aren't worth anything on plots unless we
>>> actually try things out that way.
>>>
>>
> I know its a bit of a problem because bitmaps are often not identical
> (different fonts etc) but that is a well-understood issue with standard
> solutions.
>
It would
Hello,
It seems that I am not the only one to have troubles with Dyck words...
sage -t --long --warn-long 81.8 src/sage/combinat/dyck_word.py
**
File "src/sage/combinat/dyck_word.py", line 3501, in
sage.combinat.dyck_word.DyckWo
On Friday, April 17, 2015 at 10:47:39 AM UTC-4, kcrisman wrote:
>
> We have lots of doctests but they aren't worth anything on plots unless we
>> actually try things out that way.
>>
>
I know its a bit of a problem because bitmaps are often not identical
(different fonts etc) but that is a well-
PS: it's true that there has been a lot of changes in the graphic part,
with the above issue as a side effect, but I am very gratefull to the
author(s) because overall this leads to major improvements: for instance,
we have now 3D rendering in the IPython notebook !
--
You received this messag
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>> Side question -- Is anything guaranteed to build all optional
>> packages? What's the current status of testing them? I keep raising
>> this issue...
>
>
> If you ever get tired of raising the issue, maybe you could try doing
> something
Le vendredi 17 avril 2015 16:47:39 UTC+2, kcrisman a écrit :
>
>
>> For Sage 6.5, it was OK.
>> For Sage 6.6.beta5, the problem was already there (but I've noticed it
>> only today, sorry...).
>>
>>
> Can I just say I'm getting tired of people changing things in visual
> representation (e.g. sho
On Friday, 17 April 2015 15:50:10 UTC+1, kcrisman wrote:
>
>
> Side question -- Is anything guaranteed to build all optional
>>> packages? What's the current status of testing them? I keep raising
>>> this issue...
>>>
>>
>> If you ever get tired of raising the issue, maybe you could try do
> Side question -- Is anything guaranteed to build all optional
>> packages? What's the current status of testing them? I keep raising
>> this issue...
>>
>
> If you ever get tired of raising the issue, maybe you could try doing
> something about it.
>
Until we have the infrastructure of
>
>
> For Sage 6.5, it was OK.
> For Sage 6.6.beta5, the problem was already there (but I've noticed it
> only today, sorry...).
>
>
Can I just say I'm getting tired of people changing things in visual
representation (e.g. show) and then not verifying it still does the same
thing VISUALLY? We
this is now #18240
On Friday, 17 April 2015 14:57:42 UTC+1, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> bump, this is still not fixed in the MPIR we ship, causing pain and
> suffering such as here:
> http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18198
>
> I'll open a ticket shortly.
>
> On Tuesday, 18 November 2014 14:39:32 UT
bump, this is still not fixed in the MPIR we ship, causing pain and
suffering such as here:
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18198
I'll open a ticket shortly.
On Tuesday, 18 November 2014 14:39:32 UTC, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
> basically, current (upstream) normaliz does not compile with gcc 4.9
Hi Nathann,
This is now http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18238
Please check carefully: I hope that by repairing this, I've not broken
something else...
Best wishes,
Eric.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this
Le Fri, 17 Apr 2015 04:52:10 -0700 (PDT),
Volker Braun a écrit :
> Still building!
>
> On Friday, April 17, 2015 at 4:06:38 AM UTC-4, Snark wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > will a bdist of sage 6.6 for ARM be available using a buildbot, or
> > shall I compile one myself ?
> >
> > Snark on #sagemath
Still building!
On Friday, April 17, 2015 at 4:06:38 AM UTC-4, Snark wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> will a bdist of sage 6.6 for ARM be available using a buildbot, or
> shall I compile one myself ?
>
> Snark on #sagemath
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sa
Fixed in http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17821 (needs review)
On Friday, April 17, 2015 at 2:42:58 AM UTC-4, Eric Gourgoulhon wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In Sage 6.6 notebooks (either Sage notebook or IPython notebook), tuples
> are displayed without parenthesis nor comma (!) when the LaTeX typeset mode
I already proposed a cool-off period, possible but somewhat annoying.
Ideally, continuous integration would start merging your ticket the second
you set it to positive review. We are not there yet, but we'll do it
eventually.
We don't need extra ticket states, we just need to agree to stop chan
Am 2015-04-17 um 12:03 schrieb Nathann Cohen:
> - A one-week delay (*) between latest commit and merge. We make sure that
> every
> last-minute change has been made. It also gives more time for everybody to
> look at the branch.
Reduces the risk of loosing commits, but does not exclude it.
As
Hell,
I also believe that something should be done about that, and that it can be
solved in much more satisfying ways. Some propositions:
- A one-week delay (*) between latest commit and merge. We make sure that every
last-minute change has been made. It also gives more time for every
Dear all,
as discussed at some length in
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/tQhromqp9hQ/KDCvCnKEd1kJ , the
release manager expects us not to push to a ticket after it has been set to
positive_review.
The reason is that merging a ticket is not an atomic step, but takes several
hours, so th
The culprit is the following line in sage.repl.rich_output.backend_base.py:
mathjax = MathJax().eval(obj, mode='plain', combine_all=True)
If combine_all is set to False, then the tuples render as expected. Volker,
is there a reason for changing this or should I open a ticket?
By the way, it's
But we digressed. Does anyone has an opinion about my original
question?
Thanks,
Dima
On Friday, 17 April 2015 07:41:02 UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> Side question -- Is anything guaranteed to build all optional
>> packages? What's the current status of testing them? I keep raising
>> this
Hi,
will a bdist of sage 6.6 for ARM be available using a buildbot, or
shall I compile one myself ?
Snark on #sagemath
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an emai
37 matches
Mail list logo
