On Sunday, February 9, 2014 7:15:02 AM UTC-6, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > > 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. >
Actually, I was thinking of doing it when I have time. This should be quite useful for what I need, but I wanted to investigate just how he's going about it. And, as you point out, it isn't a problem to add a feature that works with only one solver; we simply add an optional argument (or more), right? john perry > -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
