[sage-devel] Re: working on animation for 3d objects

2012-04-10 Thread Niles Johnson
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 1:44:21 PM UTC-4, Nils Bruin wrote: > > Excellent initiative! Thanks :) I've created the following ticket for this: http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12827 > Just make sure that animate(...) accepts general > iterables and only keeps one frame at a time

[sage-devel] Re: working on animation for 3d objects

2012-04-10 Thread Nils Bruin
Excellent initiative! Just make sure that animate(...) accepts general iterables and only keeps one frame at a time in memory. We won't get past the requirement that at one point, all frames must exist together on disk in a directory, but it would be nice to avoid having a full description of all f

[sage-devel] Re: working on animation for 3d objects

2012-04-10 Thread Jonathan
Niles, Great! However, we need to get together on this. I'm slowly working towards solving some of these problems. Unfortunately, I get a couple of hours a week to work on this until May/June, then things will open up a bit. See trac 12299, where I have updated Jmol to produce static images

Re: [sage-devel] Re: working on animation for 3d objects

2012-04-09 Thread David Roe
I think it's fine to change it, since we actively discourage users from using is_* functions outside of library code. David On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 17:42, Niles Johnson wrote: > > On Monday, April 9, 2012 5:02:45 PM UTC-4, Niles Johnson wrote: >> >> But I haven't found a Trac ticket for it -- cou

[sage-devel] Re: working on animation for 3d objects

2012-04-09 Thread Niles Johnson
On Monday, April 9, 2012 5:02:45 PM UTC-4, Niles Johnson wrote: > > But I haven't found a Trac ticket for it -- could someone point it out to > me if it doesn't exist? > > Er, I mean, could someone point out a ticket if it *does* exist? Also, I've since learned that is_Graphics is used exactly o