More questions about the Programming Guide:
It says:
"You might also write additional documentation in \Latex, which is not
to
be part of any source code file. The examples in this documentation
should be contained in verbatim environments. The examples should be
tested using \code{sage-testtex}, which you run on the \Latex file."
Are there examples of this sort of additional documentation in the
Sage library? And what is sage-testtex?
In the Interfaces chapter it says:
"You can create \SAGE pseudo-tty interfaces that allow \SAGE to
work with an almost completely arbitrary command line program,
and don't require any modification or extensions to the
command line program."
Are there examples (maybe in sage/interfaces) which are good
illustrations of this?
On Aug 17, 7:31 pm, John H Palmieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been thinking about editing the Sage Programming Guide, and I
> have many questions.
>
> First, what do you think about changing the name to the Sage
> Developers' Guide, or something like that, since most of the document
> has more to do with development issues than programming issues?
>
> Specific questions:
>
> According to this page <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node7.html>,
> authors of Sage code are supposed to "share copyright with William
> Stein". Is this accurate?
>
> According to the page <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node8.html>, every
> function is supposed to have an AUTHORS block. Is this really right,
> or is it okay to only have an AUTHORS block at the top of the file?
>
> What's the status, accuracy-wise, of the coercion section <http://
> sagemath.org/doc/prog/node17.html>, given the new coercion code?
>
> In the mutability section <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node18.html>,
> there is a comment saying "Rewrite. Difficult to parse. Make gentler",
> and "Put a tutorial on this here". Anyone have specific ideas about
> how to do this?
>
> The page <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node21.html> is called
> "Creating a Sage Module or Package". What's the difference?
>
> In the same page, it says (after saying you can use C++, Cython, etc.
> for coding parts of your wonderful new package), "For readability and
> usability it is best to use Sage when possible." What does it mean to
> "use Sage"? Would it be better to say "use Python"?
>
> A few pages later <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node24.html>, it says
> that once you have a new package, you can "Send a copy to the sage-
> devel Google group so it can be posted to the Sage web site, so
> anybody can automatically install it by typing sage -i my_package-
> version.spkg." Is this really right, or should it be submitted to the
> trac server and await refereeing?
>
> The page <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node29.html> on
> testing .py, .pyx, and .sage files has an email to William about
> doctesting and importing. Can someone suggest how to incorporate this
> into the text?
>
> For the Mercurial chapter: how important is the page <http://
> sagemath.org/doc/prog/node73.html>, "Updating To the Latest Official
> Sage Library Source Code"? Its references to kdiff3 are not
> appropriate, among other things.
>
> The "Miscellaneous" chapter <http://sagemath.org/doc/prog/node74.html>
> is a real mess. The first section is a transcript of an IRC chat; the
> second section is called "Weird issues" and only discusses one thing;
> and the third has no explanatory text at all. Any suggestions for
> improvements?
>
> Thanks,
> John
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
