On Wed, 30 Aug 2017, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
What if we add tests of, say, random graphs to this file? Or
should we
have basically one function in one file?
It doesn't have to necessarily be one function, but I think it would be good
to keep it closer to one specific type of o
On Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 12:41:26 AM UTC+9, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2017-08-30 09:37, david@inria.fr wrote:
> > It's not a bug, it's how equality is defined
>
> Thinking of the coercion model, I would argue that this is a bug.
>
It is not a bug as it behaves as documented. Bu
Great work!
> Some more typos:
* plots will saved -> plots will be saved
* (HAV) to enabled -> (HAV) to be enabled
* should be considered a service -> should be considered as a service
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubs
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 12:27:04 PM UTC-5, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
>
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2017, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
> > Looks good (other than call the file something like "lattice_tests.py").
>
> What if we add tests of, say, random graphs to this file? Or should we
> have basically
Thanks for the feedback!
On Aug 30, 2017 19:32, "David Roe" wrote:
Looks good! Here are a few suggestions
It might be worth adding some reasons that a VM is onerous (having to use
an unfamiliar OS, difficulties with file system access and networking)
Yeah, I think you're right. I cons
Looks good! Here are a few suggestions
It might be worth adding some reasons that a VM is onerous (having to use
an unfamiliar OS, difficulties with file system access and networking)
You say "Sage Math Console" but the picture just says "Sage Math 8.0".
I assume that the {:class="img-re
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
Looks good (other than call the file something like "lattice_tests.py").
What if we add tests of, say, random graphs to this file? Or should we
have basically one function in one file?
Now to fully flush it out. Once all the tests are in there, w
As I observed on the sage-release Sage.8.1.beta3 thread, a library conflict
causes 'make ptestlong' to fail under openSUSE LEAP 42.2. Reworking the
offending symlink in the sage installation to point to the system library
fixes the problem. The two copies of "libreadline.so.6.3" are NOT
identic
> > So the use would be something like
> >
> > sage: from some.place.tests import test_finite_lattice
> > sage: for L in big_list_of_random_lattices:
> > sage: test_finite_lattice(L)
> > sage: print("All OK")
>
> > Yes, but I would not do the print().
>
>
Hi all,
I've drafted a blog post describing some of my work on the Windows
installer for Sage. You can see the post previewed here:
https://github.com/embray/OpenDreamKit.github.io/blob/blog/sage-windows/_posts/2017-08-28-SageWindows.md
I'd appreciate any feedback / corrections / suggestions /
On 2017-08-30 09:37, david.coud...@inria.fr wrote:
It's not a bug, it's how equality is defined
Thinking of the coercion model, I would argue that this is a bug.
Of course we don't do coercions for graphs, but one could imagine a coercion
graphs without loops -> graphs with loops
and then th
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
So the use would be something like
sage: from some.place.tests import test_finite_lattice
sage: for L in big_list_of_random_lattices:
sage: test_finite_lattice(L)
sage: print("All OK")
Yes, but I would not do the
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 1:16:37 AM UTC-5, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
>
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2017, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
> >> Thank you for doing this. Do you want to add this as a file into the
> >> $SAGE_SRC/sage/tests? How long does it take to run these tests on your
> >> system?
>
> >
Hi,
Has anyone here tried playing around with the SIXEL graphics format
for Sage plots before? SIXEL [1] is a graphics format that was
supported by VT300 terminals for displaying images in the terminal,
and many terminal emulators support it. For example, gnuplot has long
been able to display pl
On 2017-08-28 12:45, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
- Are there plans to enforce the above future imports to our doctests? In
particular unicode_literals which seems more problematic?
TL;DR: I do not consider it a problem that stuff breaks with "from
__future__ import unicode_literals".
The oth
It's not a bug, it's how equality is defined (they have the same settings
for loops, multiedges and weightedness). It's different from being
isomorphic.
def __eq__(self, other):
"""
Compare self and other for equality.
Do not call this method directly. That is, for `
16 matches
Mail list logo
