> It was an interesting read. The article (at potential risk of starting > a firestorm) does seem to suggest that open-source software like Sage is > more trustworthy for computational proofs as one can (in principle) verify > the code's logic and can look at the list of known bugs. > >> >> In principle. But naturally we have a bug tracker for a reason. Also, I didn't have time to look at the article they referenced about some experience with open source; perhaps someone could summarize it.
-- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
