> For my purpose of learning Cython, this approach was more useful and certainly faster. > > As for this works usefulness for Sage: the numerical module is far more than just a wrapper for GLPK (also, but not limited to, wrappers for CBC, Gurobi, CPLEX, and a wrapper to unify them all). Such coverage makes code modifications more difficult (much more factors to take into account). With what I have done now, the maintainers of the numerical module can copy the parts of the glpk.pxd file I created they deem useful, the same goes for the glpk-constants.pxi file.
Ahahahaah. Well, there are no numerical/ "maintainers", unfortunately. Only contributors, who add some stuff there when they need it for themselves, and want to help by sharing it with others. I am afraid that if you chose to write this code somewhere else, nobody else will do the job of making it Sage code, for everybody else's loss. There is no problem with changing the way the interface between Sage and LP solvers is written when needed, though. The fact that only one solver supports a feature must not mean that it never gets implemented in Sage. Especially when this solver is GLPK, i.e. the default one. I don't like to write cplex-specific code myself, but if there is a GLPK counterpart now that is a different thing :-) Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
