Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2024-06-29 Thread Matthias Koeppe
On Tuesday, June 25, 2024 at 4:01:01 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Sunday, June 23, 2024 at 3:32:14 PM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 10:29:12 AM UTC-7 Starx wrote: This discussion stems from: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/979bdce

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2024-06-25 Thread Matthias Koeppe
On Sunday, June 23, 2024 at 3:32:14 PM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 10:29:12 AM UTC-7 Starx wrote: This discussion stems from: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/979bdce4e002cd05/e8061b2ff21a4cdf?lnk=gst&q=is_AlgebraElement#e8061b2ff21a4cd

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2024-06-23 Thread Vincent Delecroix
Thanks for your efforts on this cleaning! We had these around for so long (and no good reason). Best Vincent On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 at 00:32, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 10:29:12 AM UTC-7 Starx wrote: > > This discussion stems from: > http://groups.google.com/group/sage

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2024-06-23 Thread Matthias Koeppe
On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 10:29:12 AM UTC-7 Starx wrote: This discussion stems from: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/979bdce4e002cd05/e8061b2ff21a4cdf?lnk=gst&q=is_AlgebraElement#e8061b2ff21a4cdf [...] The is_functions (is_Integer, is_AlgebraElement, ect) are d

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2012-04-10 Thread Starx
So far this patch only deletes an is_* function if it literally does nothing but wrap a call to isinstance without even changing the name. If there's a change in the class name because of a factory or if the is_* function does something more complicated like test a few different classes then that's

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2012-04-10 Thread Volker Braun
I though the depreciation is for including is_* in the global namespace only. My impression was that they are to stay in the library code as an internal way to test that an argument is already of a suitable type. Generally, is_X(foo) is more strict than foo in X: sage: is_Integer(5/1) /home/vbr

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2012-03-27 Thread Nicolas M. Thiery
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:29:12AM -0700, Starx wrote: > ... +1 on reducing the number of is_... functions. > As for the other 150, some of them do the following: > > def is_Name(x) >return isinstance(x, Name_something) > > I didn't check but I suspect that there is a factory called Name wh

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2012-03-27 Thread Starx
> How much are these functions used in the Sage library? Not counting definitions, imports, or doctests, "is_[A-Z]" matches 807 times in the source. So I would definitely be writing a script to remove whatever we decide to remove, and then make sure it builds and tests, and read through the diff

Re: [sage-devel] Deleting depreciated is_functions

2012-03-27 Thread David Roe
How much are these functions used in the Sage library? I would be supportive of removing them all if possible David On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 18:29, Starx wrote: > This discussion stems from: > > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/979bdce4e002cd05/e8061b2ff21a4cdf?