On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 2:38:44 PM UTC+1, vdelecroix wrote:
>
> On 24/07/16 05:13, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> > I believe that the work on libGAP interface might better wait for GAP
> > folks to come up with their own libGAP. They refused to merge "our"
> > libGAP, and they say they have thei
On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Vincent Delecroix
<20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24/07/16 05:13, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>>
>> I believe that the work on libGAP interface might better wait for GAP
>> folks to come up with their own libGAP. They refused to merge "our"
>> libGAP, and they say
On 24/07/16 05:13, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
I believe that the work on libGAP interface might better wait for GAP
folks to come up with their own libGAP. They refused to merge "our"
libGAP, and they say they have their own version in the works, which
they need to create a Jupyter kernel for GAP.
I
I believe that the work on libGAP interface might better wait for GAP folks to
come up with their own libGAP. They refused to merge "our" libGAP, and they say
they have their own version in the works, which they need to create a Jupyter
kernel for GAP.
Dima
--
You received this message becau
Hey all,
On https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18266, Vincent and I are having a
discussion about how much coercion an interface, GAP in this particular
instance, should have. PARI currently has everything being able to coerce
in. GAP currently only has select rings, but Vincent's proposal is t
