Hi I've encountered this error while building Sage from sources obtained
from git -clone. I'm running Manjaro Linux 4.3.3-3-ARCH. Any ideas?
Thanks
John
/lib/../lib64/libqd.so: undefined reference to
`std::__cxx11::basic_string,
std::allocator >::push_back(char)@GLIBCXX_3.4.21'
/lib/../lib64/
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 4:19:08 PM UTC+2, Erik Bray wrote:
>
> One of my top wishlist items for Python 4 is some kind of __hasattr__
> special method for classes and/or an equivalent for descriptors that
> merely guarantees* that accessing the attribute of that name will not
> result in an A
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:08 PM, Justin C. Walker wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I have couple of questions regarding "attributes" in Python/Sage:
>
> 1. If hasattr(X, "foo") returns True, does that mean that "X.foo" should not
> blow up?
Yes, this does, because unfortunately hasattr(X, 'foo') actually
Note also that for the same reason one element tuples are printed as
(x,). Because (1) can be confused with paranthesis around a 1.
I guess the idea is that: you want to rebuild an object from its string
representation (really, just copy-paste in the command line).
On 01/04/16 06:12, Sébastie
Indeed, looks like to come from IPython (not Python) :
$ sage -python
Python 2.7.10 (default, Apr 1 2016, 01:03:57)
[GCC 4.9.3] on darwin
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> set([1])
Just to expand on that answer: Plain python prints the empty dictionary as
{} so it has the potential to be confusing to people that know Python:
>>> set()
set([])
>>> set([1])
set([1])
>>> dict()
{}
>>> dict(a=1)
{'a': 1}
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 11:07:48 AM UTC+2, Viviane Pons wrote:
>
>
I would say it's a python thing, and it's probably because {} is actually a
dictionarry and not a set.
2016-04-01 11:04 GMT+02:00 Sébastien Labbé :
> sage: set([1])
> {1}
> sage: set()
> set()
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sage-devel" group.
sage: set([1])
{1}
sage: set()
set()
--
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 email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 1:24:30 AM UTC+2, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> > Just because a method is callable doesn't mean that it can't raise
> > exceptions, including NotImplementedErrors. There's no reasonable way
> to
> > tell if a method will raise an exception or not without calling it.
