Dear William, dear all,
(I am CC'ing Sage-Combinat which may be interested by this thread on
sage-devel)
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 06:44:21PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
> (3) Have other Python libraries (like psage:
> http://code.google.com/p/purplesage/source/browse/), which depend on
>
Hi William,
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 06:44:21PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
> When I started Sage I viewed it as a distribution of a bunch of math
> software, and Python as just the interpreter language I happen to use
> at the time. I didn't even know if using Python as the language would
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:44 PM, William Stein wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When I started Sage I viewed it as a distribution of a bunch of math
>> software, and Python as just the interpreter language I happen to use
>> at the time. I didn't even k
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:44 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I started Sage I viewed it as a distribution of a bunch of math
> software, and Python as just the interpreter language I happen to use
> at the time. I didn't even know if using Python as the language would
> last. However, i
On 10/27/10 02:44 AM, William Stein wrote:
Hi,
When I started Sage I viewed it as a distribution of a bunch of math
software, and Python as just the interpreter language I happen to use
at the time. I didn't even know if using Python as the language would
last. However, it's also possible to
An analogy. If Sage is the "journal" of code, trac is the arxiv.
Unfortunately, it's not very easy to use the code on trac--the system
you're proposing would make it much easier to share this kind of code.
The question is, at what cost to the publication?
--
To post to this group, send an email t
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:44 PM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I started Sage I viewed it as a distribution of a bunch of math
> software, and Python as just the interpreter language I happen to use
> at the time. I didn't even know if using Python as the language would
> last. However, i
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Dan Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 at 06:44PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
>> (1) Have a Python library called "sagecore", which is just the most
>> important standard spkg's (e.g., Singular, PARI, etc.), perhaps
>> eventually built *only* as shared object li
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 at 06:44PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
> (1) Have a Python library called "sagecore", which is just the most
> important standard spkg's (e.g., Singular, PARI, etc.), perhaps
> eventually built *only* as shared object libraries (no standalone
> interpreters).
What about those
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 at 06:44PM -0700, William Stein wrote:
> Anyway, it has occurred to me (a few times, and again recently) that
> it would be possible to make much of the Sage distribution, without
> Python of course, into a Python library. What I mean is the following.
> You would have a big Pyt
I'm of mixed opinions about this.
First impression:
This may be easier on developers, but this could be a sturdy nail in
the coffin of "Sage as a viable replacement to M*". Fragmenting Sage
even further is going to make it harder to install, and harder to
ensure any standards of
* quality
* p
Hi,
When I started Sage I viewed it as a distribution of a bunch of math
software, and Python as just the interpreter language I happen to use
at the time. I didn't even know if using Python as the language would
last. However, it's also possible to think of Sage as a Python
library.
Anyway, i
12 matches
Mail list logo
