On Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 21:54:03 UTC-7 David Coudert wrote:
The current design choice in `EdgesView` is to sort only when asking for
the list of edges, that is when calling `__repr__` if `sort=True`.
The alternative is to sort at the initialization of the object and to cache
the sorted lis
On Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 08:29:44 UTC-7 Edgar Costa wrote:
Hi Gonzalo,
I highly recommend using https://github.com/rfjakob/earlyoom instead of
waiting for OOM to kick in.
Wouldn't setting ulimit with -m (memory) or -v (virtual memory) for the
process that is liable to exceed its memory quo
Thanks David for your suggestions!
I've now created a wiki page at
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NEP-29:-Python-version-strategy that
on the one hand clarifies a few questions that were raised before and on
the other hand summarizes the discussion we had so far. I tried to add all
poi
Thanks Tobias for creating this wiki page.
I will edit it today so it presents more than 1 proposal on equal footing.
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 9:36:25 AM UTC-7 Tobias Diez wrote:
> Thanks David for your suggestions!
>
> I've now created a wiki page at
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wi
@Vincent: yes, the construction of EdgesView is in O(1) and it's nice.
Unfortunately, I don't know how to check that sorting may lead to an error
at construction without doing it. At least the current behavior is
documented.
@Nils: I fully agree with you and soon the default value of parameter
I am attempting to add a module to sage "covering_array.py" for an open
pull request. When building documentation on the pull request I get an
error
"Warning: Could not import sage.combinat.designs.covering_array No module
named 'sage.combinat.designs.covering_array'
although the file coverin
It's a bug in the CI script.
Merge https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35865, and it will work
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 1:47:06 PM UTC-7 Aaron Dwyer wrote:
> I am attempting to add a module to sage "covering_array.py" for an open
> pull request. When building documentation on the pull req
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 09:36:25 UTC-7 Tobias Diez wrote:
Thanks David for your suggestions!
I've now created a wiki page at
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NEP-29:-Python-version-strategy that
on the one hand clarifies a few questions that were raised before and on
the other hand s
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 2:25:12 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 09:36:25 UTC-7 Tobias Diez wrote:
Thanks David for your suggestions!
I've now created a wiki page at
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/NEP-29:-Python-version-strategy that
on the one hand clarifies
I'm done with editing for today. There are still a number of major "TBD"s
there; others are welcome to help with these.
Matthias
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 10:19:15 AM UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> Thanks Tobias for creating this wiki page.
>
> I will edit it today so it presents more than
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 14:55:35 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
I don't think so; I think there is an effective difference of about 6–9
months.
Just O(1), of course, but so are the release cadences of OS distributions
and major packages.
In NEP 29 I see a 42 month window; in Proposal 2 I als
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 4:51:57 PM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote:
On Thursday, 6 July 2023 at 14:55:35 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
I don't think so; I think there is an effective difference of about 6–9
months.
Just O(1), of course, but so are the release cadences of OS distributions
and major p
On 2023-07-06 09:16:46, Nils Bruin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 5 July 2023 at 08:29:44 UTC-7 Edgar Costa wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gonzalo,
> >
> > I highly recommend using https://github.com/rfjakob/earlyoom instead of
> > waiting for OOM to kick in.
>
> Wouldn't setting ulimit with -m (memory) or -v (vi
Proposal 2 simply describes the current practice. PR author proposes and
builds the case for the change, and a normal discussion take place on the
PR.
I want to see, in the wiki page, a summary of what are (or should be)
considered to "build the case", which could be used as an agenda for a
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 6:01:02 PM UTC-7 Kwankyu Lee wrote:
Proposal 2 simply describes the current practice. PR author proposes and
builds the case for the change, and a normal discussion take place on the
PR.
I want to see, in the wiki page, a summary of what are (or should be)
conside
Thanks Matthias!
brett
On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 5:14:34 PM UTC-4 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
> It's a bug in the CI script. Merge
> https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35865, and it will work
>
> On Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 1:47:06 PM UTC-7 Aaron Dwyer wrote:
>
>> I am attempting to add a mo
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35906
Discussions very welcome
Matthias
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups
Not so much, but because people working in matroids usually need more
speed, it tends to mean more Cython code. Compare how your implementation
is done with the matroids in Sage. (For instance, you can have a category
(even with Cython), but there are a number of categories that are more
meant
18 matches
Mail list logo
