> That I definitely agree with. I would be very disturbed if we had
> a java app that implemented important computational functionality
> that is not available from the command line. There was actually
> a numerical analysis java applet that is GPL'd that was discussed
> here a while ago that wo
On Jan 22, 2008 4:51 PM, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 22, 2008, at 5:41 AM, mhampton wrote:
>
> > I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
> > makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
> > understand the architecture of what t
On Jan 22, 2008, at 5:41 AM, mhampton wrote:
> I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
> makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
> understand the architecture of what this is supposed to do.
The way I understand it, JASON is a simple format to se
On 22-Jan-08, at 6:03 PM, Ted Kosan wrote:
>
> Justin wrote:
>
>> It's not true that testing GUIs is in any way impossible (I believe
>> several companies make such products, and make a pretty good living
>> at it).
>>
>> However, I don't think there is a freely-available way to do it, and
>> in
Justin wrote:
> It's not true that testing GUIs is in any way impossible (I believe
> several companies make such products, and make a pretty good living
> at it).
>
> However, I don't think there is a freely-available way to do it, and
> in this aspect, your point is well-taken, and reinforces t
On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
>>> makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
>>> understand the architecture of what this is supposed to do.
>>
>> Wouldn't a Java applet imply tha
On Jan 22, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Nick Alexander wrote:
> On 22-Jan-08, at 9:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
understand the architecture of what this is supp
On Jan 22, 2008, at 5:54 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
>
>> I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
>> makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
>> understand the architecture of what this is supposed to do.
>
> Wouldn't a Java applet imply that the f
William wrote:
> I propose the following:
>
> (1) Json support is made an optional package
> (2) Once there are some actual interesting uses of it, then we
>seriously consider making it a standard package. (This could
>be a week from now, etc.)
+1
Ted
--~--~-~--~--
On Jan 22, 2008 5:41 AM, mhampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I agree - an optional package makes more sense for the moment. The
> spkg is less than a mb, fortunately, so adding it to the standard
> packages eventually wouldn't inflate the total size that much.
I propose the following:
(1)
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Nick Alexander wrote:
> >>> I would like to establish some (roughly) like this: If a
> >>> computation cannot be
> >>> expressed from the command line (in pure Python) then it cannot be
> >>> a standard
> >>> part of Sage. E.g. if you cannot compute $sin(x)$ for some $x$
> >
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Nick Alexander wrote:
>
>
> On 22-Jan-08, at 9:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>
I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
understand the architecture of what this is
On 22-Jan-08, at 9:08 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
>>> makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
>>> understand the architecture of what this is supposed to do.
>>
>> Wouldn't a Java applet imply that t
>> I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
>> makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
>> understand the architecture of what this is supposed to do.
>
> Wouldn't a Java applet imply that the functionality it provides could only be
> accessed via Sa
> I think this could be an exciting way to get all the java applet
> makers out there interested in sage, although I don't completely
> understand the architecture of what this is supposed to do.
Wouldn't a Java applet imply that the functionality it provides could only be
accessed via Sage's we
I agree - an optional package makes more sense for the moment. The
spkg is less than a mb, fortunately, so adding it to the standard
packages eventually wouldn't inflate the total size that much.
There are several optional packages that I use a lot and I hope to
eventually have in sage as standa
On Jan 22, 2008 5:05 AM, Ted Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> William wrote:
>
> > > If further testing is successful, I would like to have simpleJSON
> > > included in SAGE. What procedure do I need to follow in order to make
> > > an official software addition request?
> >
> > (1) Convince
William wrote:
> > If further testing is successful, I would like to have simpleJSON
> > included in SAGE. What procedure do I need to follow in order to make
> > an official software addition request?
>
> (1) Convince us it's a good idea. You basically just did that.
>
> (2) Create a trac tick
William wrote
> > If further testing is successful, I would like to have simpleJSON
> > included in SAGE. What procedure do I need to follow in order to make
> > an official software addition request?
>
> (1) Convince us it's a good idea. You basically just did that.
>
> (2) Create a trac ticket
On Dec 10, 2007 8:50 AM, Ted Kosan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have been experimenting with techniques for allowing Java applets to
> communicate with the SAGE server and the technique I like the best so
> far is to use JSON objects (http://json.org). I am currently using
> simpleJSON (http:
20 matches
Mail list logo
