Benjamin Jones
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Starx wrote:
>> Trac has been very slow for me these last few days and now it's cause
>> patchbot to fail on one of my patches:
>> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12630
>>
>> So two questio
> Mathxy
-1
> I have discussed the name "Sage" with an actual lawyer, and if nothing
> else he convinced me that the sort of discussion going on in this
> thread about the name is naive. As I like the name "Sage", I'm
> personally only interested in name change discussions with an actual
> lawy
Trac has been very slow for me these last few days and now it's cause
patchbot to fail on one of my patches:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12630
So two questions:
1) Is trac slow for anyone else? Can something be done?
2) Will patchbot sort itself out or do I need to do something to
So far this patch only deletes an is_* function if it literally does
nothing but wrap a call to isinstance without even changing the name.
If there's a change in the class name because of a factory or if the
is_* function does something more complicated like test a few
different classes then that's
Well, I wrote a script to delete some of the is_* functions, but it
turned out to be a little more complicated of a task then I thought it
would be, so this patch doesn't delete as many as I was aiming for but
at least it's a start: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12824
-Jim
On Thu, Mar
>> What version of XCode, GCC, etc.? Did you upgrade anything? This
>> looks like exactly the sort of bug that one would have with XCode 4.x
>> but *not* with XCode 3.x.
I have Xcode 3.2.6, but 'which gcc' no longer returns anything. I did
have gcc and have no idea where it could have gone. Fr
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Starx wrote:
>>
>> So I planned to build a new copy of 4.8 and then try out -upgrade to
>> get beta11... but I couldn't build 4.8!! I got the following after
>> the build:
>>
>> Testing that Sage
l now terminate.
local/bin/sage-sage: line 766: 20815 Segmentation fault sage-eval "$@"
Sage failed to start up.
Please email sage-devel (http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel)
explaining the problem and send th
ough the diff to make sure the script didn't do
anything unexpected.
-Jim
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:05 AM, David Roe wrote:
> How much are these functions used in the Sage library? I would be
> supportive of removing them all if possible
> David
>
> On Tue, Ma
Actually I think deleting the is_functions deserves it's own thread,
so ignore my last message and see:
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/e8c2470e270f616b
-Jim
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Starx wrote:
> There are 260 functions defined in Sage of the
This discussion stems from:
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/979bdce4e002cd05/e8061b2ff21a4cdf?lnk=gst&q=is_AlgebraElement#e8061b2ff21a4cdf
I decided it deserves it's own thread.
The is_functions (is_Integer, is_AlgebraElement, ect) are depreciated
and have been for 4
There are 260 functions defined in Sage of the form def is_Name(x)
where Name starts with a capitol letter (my script didn't count the
cdef functions so there might actually be more). Of those 110 of them
simply return isinstance(x, Name) and I think those 110 can definitely
be deleted. Deleting
I was looking at the function is_AlgebraElement which needs a doctest.
When I called it in sage (to come up with a doctest) I got a
depreciation warning:
sage: is_AlgebraElement(e)
/Users/Starx/sage-dev/local/bin/sage-ipython:1: DeprecationWarning:
Using is_AlgebraElement from the top level is
March 24, 2012 1:45:01 PM UTC+8, P Purkayastha wrote:
>>
>> > On Saturday, March 24, 2012 5:04:32 AM UTC+8, Starx wrote:
>>
>> >> So I'm trying to upgrade my beta7 to beta9. It didn't work and I'm
>> >> not sure how to interpret what hap
So I'm trying to upgrade my beta7 to beta9. It didn't work and I'm
not sure how to interpret what happened:
~/sage-dev/devel/sage-main Starx$ ../../sage -upgrade
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/release/sage-5.0.beta9/sage-5.0.beta9/&usg=AFQjCNFNueKjqvL-1BX7yv9vvQV1fbl
It looks like the order of the elements was being determined by their
id which would be system dependent. I've updated the patch and all
should be well now. Thanx for the help.
-Jim
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Mar 11, 8:46 pm, Starx wrote:
>> T
The patchbot is reporting a doctest failure in a patch of mine:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12630#comment:10
The failure itself is completely benign, "a + b" is being returned
when "b + a" is expected, but the addition is commutative anyway. So
I'm not so concerned with the particul
17 matches
Mail list logo
