Hi!
On 2015-02-08, Volker Braun wrote:
> IMHO thats unnecessarily confusing for novices. You shouldn't have to=20
> understand Python OOP to be able to read the documentation. INPUT documents=
> the parameters, and nothing else. Of course such restrictions need to be=20
> mentioned elsewhere in t
On Monday, 9 February 2015 20:29:27 UTC+11, Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On 2015-02-08, Volker Braun > wrote:
> > IMHO thats unnecessarily confusing for novices. You shouldn't have to=20
> > understand Python OOP to be able to read the documentation. INPUT
> documents=
> > the parameters, a
AFAIR we had a preliminary cmake build system for legacy Singular but it is
not yet ported to the current Singular (SW),
whose build system is currently based on autoconf & automake.
we may do that at some point.
ps: IMHO
following
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5971921/building-a-librar
Recently I hit a very weird issue on sage trac:
It was for me not possible to post a comment with a specific wording, (see
attached ASCII file),
neither did the trac preview work: it just hangs. When I change the text to
some extent, the issue goes away
It does not matter on which ticket one t
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:52 AM, Andrew wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, 9 February 2015 20:29:27 UTC+11, Simon King wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 2015-02-08, Volker Braun wrote:
>> > IMHO thats unnecessarily confusing for novices. You shouldn't have to=20
>> > understand Python OOP to be able to read the docu
On Monday, February 9, 2015 at 6:56:51 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> sage-6.5.rc1/src/doc/output/html/en/reference$ rgrep self *|wc -l
> 11748
I don't really mind using "self" as a way to refer to the instance in the
docstring, its natural and understandable even if you don't know Python
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Monday, February 9, 2015 at 6:56:51 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
>>
>> sage-6.5.rc1/src/doc/output/html/en/reference$ rgrep self *|wc -l
>> 11748
>
>
> I don't really mind using "self" as a way to refer to the instance in the
> docstring
On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 2:14:04 AM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> Please read the rest of my message, in particular the section that
> starts "B. The main question -- what about explicitly documenting self
> in the INPUTS block?", which is about exactly this.
>
I read that but the number of
Tried it and posted just fine (on #5522)
On Monday, February 9, 2015 at 2:38:51 PM UTC+1, Jakob Kroeker wrote:
>
> Recently I hit a very weird issue on sage trac:
>
> It was for me not possible to post a comment with a specific wording,
> (see attached ASCII file),
> neither did the trac preview
I strongly agree with Volker. It would be better that the INPUT block
(and not INPUTS by the way) to fit with the arguments of the methods.
My conviction is just based on the fact that the reader want to know
what to feed to its function!
The examples that William grepped are indeed problematic. B
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 2:14:04 AM UTC+1, William wrote:
>>
>> Please read the rest of my message, in particular the section that
>> starts "B. The main question -- what about explicitly documenting self
>> in the INPUTS block?", which
11 matches
Mail list logo
