On 24 Mai, 01:18, Tim Daly wrote:
> how about using:
>
> find . -name "*.pyx" -exec touch {} \;
We can save one more character:
find . -name \*.pyx -exec touch {} \;
-Leif
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
s
how about using:
find . -name "*.pyx" -exec touch {} \;
William A. Stein wrote:
On May 23, 2010, at 1:12 PM, leif wrote:
On 23 Mai, 21:40, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
'lcalc' had a particularly annoying attempt to cover up warnings from the
assembler, as it actually caused the build
On 23 Mai, 22:41, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> On 05/23/10 09:16 PM, William A. Stein wrote:
> > Instead of keeping this as a favorite, implement a better version, and post
> > a patch.
Work in progress. (But things depend on reviewing/merging other
tickets, too.
> I'm not going to hunt down the
On 05/23/10 09:16 PM, William A. Stein wrote:
On May 23, 2010, at 1:12 PM, leif wrote:
On 23 Mai, 21:40, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
'lcalc' had a particularly annoying attempt to cover up warnings from the
assembler, as it actually caused the build to break on Solaris, as the option to
cover
On May 23, 2010, at 1:12 PM, leif wrote:
> On 23 Mai, 21:40, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
>> 'lcalc' had a particularly annoying attempt to cover up warnings from the
>> assembler, as it actually caused the build to break on Solaris, as the
>> option to
>> cover up the warnings was passed directly
On May 23, 2010, at 1:12 PM, leif wrote:
> On 23 Mai, 21:40, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
>> 'lcalc' had a particularly annoying attempt to cover up warnings from the
>> assembler, as it actually caused the build to break on Solaris, as the
>> option to
>> cover up the warnings was passed directly
On 23 Mai, 21:40, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> 'lcalc' had a particularly annoying attempt to cover up warnings from the
> assembler, as it actually caused the build to break on Solaris, as the option
> to
> cover up the warnings was passed directly to the Sun assembler, but it did not
> accept th
On 05/23/10 04:18 PM, leif wrote:
The more evil thing is that currently *all* warnings in the
compilation of C/C++ Sage library files are suppressed by a *trailing*
"-w", so nobody will see any warning unless he/she edits setup.py
Unfortunately, this is all too common in many components of Sag
On 23 Mai, 14:29, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> On 05/23/10 01:27 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
> > *Both* -ansi and -pedantic should be used for the best conformance to
> > standards, though it will not be perfect. But I doubt the Sage library
> > would build with those. If Cython could generate co
On 05/23/10 01:27 PM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
*Both* -ansi and -pedantic should be used for the best conformance to
standards, though it will not be perfect. But I doubt the Sage library
would build with those. If Cython could generate code that works with
those options, there is some hope the l
On 05/22/10 01:59 PM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
On 22 Mai, 13:17, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
On 05/22/10 03:24 AM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
On 21 Mai, 19:42, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
Please let us know if you run into *any* examples of this--our goal is
to always produce standard compliant C89 or C
On 22 Mai, 13:17, "Dr. David Kirkby" wrote:
> On 05/22/10 03:24 AM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
> > On 21 Mai, 19:42, Robert Bradshaw
> > wrote:
> >> Please let us know if you run into *any* examples of this--our goal is
> >> to always produce standard compliant C89 or C++ code (or C99 if the
> >> use
On 05/22/10 03:24 AM, Nathan O'Treally wrote:
On 21 Mai, 19:42, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
Please let us know if you run into *any* examples of this--our goal is
to always produce standard compliant C89 or C++ code (or C99 if the
user has requested C99 complex support). Of course most Cython users
a
On 21 Mai, 19:42, Robert Bradshaw
wrote:
> Please let us know if you run into *any* examples of this--our goal is
> to always produce standard compliant C89 or C++ code (or C99 if the
> user has requested C99 complex support). Of course most Cython users
> are using gcc or MSVC.
[W.r.t. Sag
> Please let us know if you run into *any* examples of this--our goal is
> to always produce standard compliant C89 or C++ code (or C99 if the
> user has requested C99 complex support). Of course most Cython users
> are using gcc or MSVC.
>
And just as important -- make sure to post some per
Thanks for the detailed email I will see what i can do.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> On Itanium systems, icc cannot compile GAP, one of Sage components.
> (well, it can, but the resulting program does not work)
>
> On May 20, 3:25 am, Mag Gam wrote:
>> Has anyone at
On Itanium systems, icc cannot compile GAP, one of Sage components.
(well, it can, but the resulting program does not work)
On May 20, 3:25 am, Mag Gam wrote:
> Has anyone attempted to compile sage with ICC? This is the Intel
> compiler. I would like to do some testing with this therefore I would
17 matches
Mail list logo
