I agree with Mike and William.
john perry
On Jan 27, 12:52 am, William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Jason Grout
> > wrote:
> >> How about this slight change in syntax:
>
> >> @interact(update=False)
> >> def _(...
>
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Jason Grout
> wrote:
>> How about this slight change in syntax:
>>
>> @interact(update=False)
>> def _(...
>
> If you wanted to do this, and still support the regular @interact
> (with no parens) syntax, the
Particularly for heavy use or ones with a fair amount of symbolic
usage I think this is a great idea. If it's not actually a little
checkbox but rather a function parameter, though, it should be quite
clear in the interact? documentation (and fairly early on) what to do,
and probably include a co
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Jason Grout
wrote:
> How about this slight change in syntax:
>
> @interact(update=False)
> def _(...
If you wanted to do this, and still support the regular @interact
(with no parens) syntax, then you'll need to make a pretty
awkward/convoluted construction in or
William Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:51 PM, john_perry_usm wrote:
>>> I'll post this to sage-support too, but I'm writing it here to ask
>>> whether people think that this should be a *default* widget that is
>>> inc
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:51 PM, john_perry_usm wrote:
>> I'll post this to sage-support too, but I'm writing it here to ask
>> whether people think that this should be a *default* widget that is
>> included with *every* Sage int
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 1:51 PM, john_perry_usm wrote:
> I'll post this to sage-support too, but I'm writing it here to ask
> whether people think that this should be a *default* widget that is
> included with *every* Sage interact. It's not a great solution, but it
> could be a start...?
