Dear William, dear David,
Very few categories are left unreviewed. Please comment shortly on the
points below, or set a positive review!
Cheers,
Nicolas
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:04:45AM +0200, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at
Dear William, dear David, Dear Javier,
Yippee, there remains essentially only eight categories left to review!
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:04:45AM +0200, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:23:15PM +0200, David R. Kohel wrote:
> > I put of positive review of most of the as
Dear David, dear Javier,
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:23:15PM +0200, David R. Kohel wrote:
> I put of positive review of most of the assigned category files.
Excellent! Thanks much!
> Note that I hadn't downloaded those attributed to Javier, so these
> are still outstanding.
Feel free to
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:01:00PM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 13, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> > Any chances for you to review shortly:
> >
> > http://combinat.sagemath.org/patches/file/tip/categories-fixsagelib-nt.patch
>
> Looks fine to me. Seems to be mostly renami
On Oct 13, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> Hi Robert, Craig,
>
> Any chances for you to review shortly:
>
> http://combinat.sagemath.org/patches/file/tip/categories-fixsagelib-nt.patch
Looks fine to me. Seems to be mostly renaming stuff and plumbing
category definitions a
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 05:45:42PM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Oct 13, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> > Any chances for you to review shortly:
> > http://combinat.sagemath.org/patches/file/tip/categories-fixsagelib-nt.patch
>
> 500 - Internal Server Error
Argl, again!
Anyo
On Oct 13, 2009, at 12:34 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> Hi Robert, Craig,
>
> Any chances for you to review shortly:
>
> http://combinat.sagemath.org/patches/file/tip/categories-fixsagelib-nt.patch
500 - Internal Server Error
- Robert
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~
Hi Robert, Craig,
Any chances for you to review shortly:
http://combinat.sagemath.org/patches/file/tip/categories-fixsagelib-nt.patch
Thanks!
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil"
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--~--~-~--~~~-
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery
wrote:
>
> Dear David, dear Javier, dear category fans,
>
> Yippee! the technical patches required by the category code are making
> their way into Sage, maybe even in 4.1.2.
Since I just finished build testing 4.1.2 on a million machines
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 12:25:54AM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > Robert: What's your time line for:
> > - the review of categories-fixsagelib-nt.patch
> > - finalizing #5597 [with patch, needs work] rename coercion action
> > methods
>
> Rebased, has doctests, needs review.
Yep. Will rev
On Sep 16, 2009, at 5:49 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> Dear category fans,
>
> Thanks to Florent (and previous work by Anne, Jason, Franco, ...) all
> the sage-combinat related categories have a positive review. There
> remains just the mostly trivial categories listed below which would
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 12:04:18AM +0200, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> With Sage 4.1.1, all sage-combinat patches applied, graphviz
> installed, and the experimental dot2tex.spkg (pfff) one can now do:
>
> sage: G = sage.categories.category.category_graph().reverse()
> sage: G.set_latex_op
Hi Tim!
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 02:39:15PM +0200, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 04:04:28AM -0400, Tim Daly wrote:
> > Do you have the inheritance graph of the categories?
>
> Almost :-) The category primer currently suggests:
>
> sage: GradedHopfAlgebrasWithBasis(Q
Dear category fans,
Thanks to Florent (and previous work by Anne, Jason, Franco, ...) all
the sage-combinat related categories have a positive review. There
remains just the mostly trivial categories listed below which would be
best reviewed by some non-sage-combinat person (standard cat
On Aug 28, 5:02 pm, John H Palmieri wrote:
> > - Are there (useful) cases where the direct product of a subcategory
> > of Sets does not coincide with the cartesian product on the
> > underlying sets?
>
> Not that I can think of right now.
The category of schemes. Not really a subcategory
On Aug 28, 5:38 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> What remains to be done is to find a good set of names to distinguish
> between the two feature sets.
>
> - The ambiguity is mostly for direct sum, right?
I think so.
> - Are there (useful) cases where the direct product of a subcategory
>
Dear Jason, Javier, John,
Thanks all for your feedback and clarification!
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:52:37AM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote:
> On Aug 26, 9:30 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> > John H Palmieri wrote:
> > > On Aug 26, 6:21 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> > > wrote:
> > >> Dear
On Aug 26, 9:30 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> John H Palmieri wrote:
> > On Aug 26, 6:21 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> > wrote:
> >> Dear and Javier, dear John,
> >> A little question: if V and W are two vector spaces which turn out to
> >> be also in stronger categories, some with direct sums,
John H Palmieri wrote:
> On Aug 26, 6:21 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> wrote:
>> Dear and Javier, dear John,
>
> [snip]
>
>> So in the long run, we definitely need both the direct sum and the
>> direct product functorial constructions, with appropriate
>> "inheritance" to share whatever is
On Aug 26, 6:21 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> Dear and Javier, dear John,
[snip]
> So in the long run, we definitely need both the direct sum and the
> direct product functorial constructions, with appropriate
> "inheritance" to share whatever is valid for both direct products and
>
Dear and Javier, dear John,
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:44:52AM -0700, javier wrote:
> On Aug 24, 1:33 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> wrote:
> > - The problem with the map a -> (a,0) is only that 1_A is mapped to
> > (1_A,0) which is not 1_{A\oplusB} = (1_A,1_B), right?
>
> This is an "e
Sorry for the late replies, was on a conference trip.
On Aug 24, 1:33 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> - The problem with the map a -> (a,0) is only that 1_A is mapped to
> (1_A,0) which is not 1_{A\oplusB} = (1_A,1_B), right?
This is an "easy to spot" problem. The deep underlying problem i
On Aug 24, 5:33 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> - The problem with the map a -> (a,0) is only that 1_A is mapped to
> (1_A,0) which is not 1_{A\oplusB} = (1_A,1_B), right?
>
> Otherwise said, the category of NonUnitalAlgebras (which is not yet
> implemented in Sage) indeed has a direct
Hi Tim!
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 04:04:28AM -0400, Tim Daly wrote:
> Do you have the inheritance graph of the categories?
Almost :-) The category primer currently suggests:
sage: GradedHopfAlgebrasWithBasis(QQ).category_graph().plot()
which gives a reasonable approximation. However
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 02:48:15AM -0700, javier wrote:
> On Aug 23, 12:56 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> wrote:
> > For the rest, this review is a bit specific: you can skip the
> > technical part of the review (checking that the patch applies
> > smoothly, pass tests, ...); this part will be done at
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 02:48:15AM -0700, javier wrote:
> > possibly simply by browsing:
> >
> >
> > http://combinat.sagemath.org/hgwebdir.cgi/code/file/tip/sage/categories)
> >
> > and make sure they makes sense.
>
> About this, I clicked on a file at random (algebras.py) to have an
> id
Nicolas
Do you have the inheritance graph of the categories?
Tim Daly
Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> Hi John!
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 12:37:11PM +0100, John Cremona wrote:
>
>> 2009/8/23 Nicolas M. Thiery :
>>
>>> So you can focus on looking at the code, doc, and tests in the fil
Hi John!
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 12:37:11PM +0100, John Cremona wrote:
> 2009/8/23 Nicolas M. Thiery :
> > So you can focus on looking at the code, doc, and tests in the files
> > mentioned in:
> >
> > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/wiki/CategoriesCategoriesReview
> >
> > possi
2009/8/23 Nicolas M. Thiery :
> So you can focus on looking at the code, doc, and tests in the files
> mentioned in:
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/wiki/CategoriesCategoriesReview
>
> possibly simply by browsing:
>
>
> http://combinat.sagemath.org/hgwebdir.cgi/code/file/tip/
2009/8/23 Nicolas M. Thiery :
>
> Dear Craig,
>
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 02:21:49PM -0700, Craig Citro wrote:
>> > So how is the baby?
>> Very overdue! But she'll hopefully be here soon. ;)
>
> So
>
> She must have been here for a couple weeks now! How is it going?
>
We'll keep c
On Aug 23, 12:56 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> For the rest, this review is a bit specific: you can skip the
> technical part of the review (checking that the patch applies
> smoothly, pass tests, ...); this part will be done at once for all the
> category code once the mathematical review wil
Dear Craig,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 02:21:49PM -0700, Craig Citro wrote:
> > So how is the baby?
> Very overdue! But she'll hopefully be here soon. ;)
So
She must have been here for a couple weeks now! How is it going?
> >> Honestly, I don't recall -- what was our plan for pat
Dear javier,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 02:17:34AM -0700, javier wrote:
> I would like to get more involved with Sage developing, and
> "mathematical sanity check" looks like something I can certainly do
> and a nice way to get started, so I will try to jump into this one.
Great, thanks!
>
Dear category fans,
For information: in principle, the new category code is now 100% doctested!
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil"
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an e
Hi Javier,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:17 PM, javier wrote:
>
> I would like to get more involved with Sage developing, and
> "mathematical sanity check" looks like something I can certainly do
> and a nice way to get started, so I will try to jump into this one.
Welcome aboard! At the moment, the
I would like to get more involved with Sage developing, and
"mathematical sanity check" looks like something I can certainly do
and a nice way to get started, so I will try to jump into this one.
Mind that I haven't been involved with Sage any further than the mail
lists so far, so any pointers w
Dear category fans,
David Kohel won't be available in the next two weeks for working on
the category review. Is there any volunteer for reviewing (some of
the) 40 categories listed under his name on:
http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/wiki/CategoriesCategoriesReview
The files are all
Dear David, dear category fans,
I just finished bringing all categories to 100% doctests, except the
following ones:
sets_cat
algebras_with_basis
examples/hopf_algebras_with_basis
See: http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/wiki/CategoriesCategoriesReview
In particular,
Dear Franco, dear category fans,
I just finished bringing AdditiveCommutativeSemigroups and friend
categories to 100% doctests. Would you have any chance to review them
in the coming days? Since they are very close from their
multiplicative counterparts, that should be a very quick job fo
Dear David, dear category fans,
We made some good progress on the review of the main category patch.
Most of the (hopf) algebra categories were reviewed by Florent Hivert,
and the semigroup/monoid ones by Franco Saliola. See the progress
report on:
http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/wiki/Cate
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Nicolas M.
Thiery wrote:
>
> Hi David (K),
>
> How far are you with the review of the category patch?
>
> I am with Florent and Franco at RISC, and will give a hard blow of
> doctest tomorrow. We would like to avoid doing things where you may
> already have
Hi David (K),
How far are you with the review of the category patch?
I am with Florent and Franco at RISC, and will give a hard blow of
doctest tomorrow. We would like to avoid doing things where you may
already have done some.
Thanks for your quick reply!
Cheers,
Yep. I don't have time tomorrow, but I can be on IRC Sunday afternoon.
David
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> > >and source introspection for dynamic classes. Someone should
> > >review these (along with the rest of my changes)
> >
> > I will make this into
> >and source introspection for dynamic classes. Someone should
> >review these (along with the rest of my changes)
>
> I will make this into a reviewer's patch for the dynamic_class patch
> #5991, and review it.
Done. Can you double check http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/5991
and,
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 04:46:27PM -0700, David Roe wrote:
>I've updated my review patches (categories-framework-ref-dr.patch and the
>small categories-tensorial_rename-dr.patch).
I just reviewed your reviewer patch this morning. Wow, thanks for the
massive work!
>Unfortunately, I
On Jul 8, 2009, at 4:46 PM, David Roe wrote:
> Discussion: we currently have CategoryObject._base as a C attribute
> because some elements want fast access to a "base." Is
> CategoryObject the right place to put this? Maybe we should
> generalize the examples of sage.rings.integer_mod.Nat
On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 11:03:21AM -0700, Craig Citro wrote:
>>
>>> What's the status on this one? I though that the bottom line of the
>>> discussion at SD15 for this one (not to be mixed up with #5986)
>>> was that:
>>>
>>> - Apart fr
I've updated my review patches (categories-framework-ref-dr.patch and the
small categories-tensorial_rename-dr.patch). Unfortunately, I won't be able
to work on this much more in the next month and a half.
categories-framework is quite close to getting a positive review; the
following are the main
> Hi Craig!
>
> So how is the baby?
>
Very overdue! But she'll hopefully be here soon. ;)
>> Honestly, I don't recall -- what was our plan for patching this in
>> the interim? Or did we not decide on anything because we got
>> sidetracked talking about #5986?
>
> We definitely got sid
Hi Craig!
So how is the baby?
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 11:03:21AM -0700, Craig Citro wrote:
>
> > What's the status on this one? I though that the bottom line of the
> > discussion at SD15 for this one (not to be mixed up with #5986) was that:
> >
> > - Apart from importing the cPic
> What's the status on this one? I though that the bottom line of the
> discussion at SD15 for this one (not to be mixed up with #5986) was that:
>
> - Apart from importing the cPickle sources into the Sage tree, the
> patch was essentially trivial (a 5 lines change to the cPickle
> code) and
Hi David (K),
On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 12:41:40PM +0200, David R. Kohel wrote:
> I think the sage-combinat build should help. During Sage Days 16 in
> Barcelona I tried naively applying the one patch you or William asked
> me to review but it failed to apply.
Hmm, did you receive the
Hi Craig, Carl, Robert, David, Franco, Burcin,
About #5985 [with patch, needs review] cPickle: adds support for class pickling
customization
What's the status on this one? I though that the bottom line of the
discussion at SD15 for this one (not to be mixed up with #5986) was that:
-
Dear David Kohel,
Can I be of any help for the reviewing of the category patch? Do you
have a timeline for your progress on this?
Best,
Nicolas
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 08:58:34AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:29:47PM +0
Dear David, dear Sage(-Combinat) devs
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 08:58:34AM -0700, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
> For the moment, the patches apply on 4.0 and 4.0.1. I am compiling
> 4.0.2 now, and will rebase the patches on Monday at the latest.
Done.
For the first time in a long while, rebasing
Dear David,
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:29:47PM +0200, William Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:58 AM, wrote:
> > Hi William,
> >
> > I'd be happy to have a look at referee this.
Thanks so much for looking at this!
> > Do I need to apply the dozen or so patches, or what is requ
;
>> ---------- Forwarded message --
>> From: Nicolas M. Thiery
>> Date: Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 9:59 AM
>> Subject: [sage-devel] Re: Categories restart
>> To: sage-devel@googlegroups.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear category fans!
>>
>> T
Dear category fans!
The original plan was for Craig to review the most mathematically
oriented (and therefore fun) part of the category patch, namely the
definition of the categories themselves. However he got burned out by
the handling of the Sage releases, and something tells me he coul
Hi!
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 02:12:26AM -0700, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>
> As many of us have stated on IRC and elsewhere, lots of us reviewing
> the categories stuff got burned out after Sage days and then busy
> with lots of other stuff. There's lots of good code here that should
>
> As many of us have stated on IRC and elsewhere, lots of us reviewing
> the categories stuff got burned out after Sage days and then busy
> with lots of other stuff. There's lots of good code here that should
> go in, and it's a blocker for much of the sage-combinat stuff as well.
+1 :-)
60 matches
Mail list logo
