#16275: Hom: introduce a check argument to simplify the unpickling detection 
logic
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  nthiery            |        Owner:
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_review
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.2
      Component:  categories         |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  homset, pickling   |    Merged in:
        Authors:  Nicolas M. ThiƩry  |    Reviewers:  Simon King
Report Upstream:  N/A                |  Work issues:
         Branch:                     |       Commit:
  u/SimonKing/ticket/16275           |  ecc4616852de61a3f1fa62bdf9dc76a61d94aaba
   Dependencies:                     |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by SimonKing):

 Replying to [comment:33 nthiery]:
 > "belonging -> belongs" in the code comment. Other than that your commit
 looks good. Thanks!

 OK, can do. But before pushing it:

 > What about including the pickle directly as a string in the docttest (or
 possibly in the code)? I think we have already done this on some other
 occasion, and this sounds appropriate to point out: ``we want this
 specific pickle to work'', rather than ``this is tested by some pickle out
 there in the pickle jar; go search for it if you want to reproduce the
 potential problem''.

 Really? This sounds ugly to me. And the purpose of the pickle jar is not
 "go search for the potential problem". IF there will be a problem in
 future then the pickle jar will inform us. So, I still think the pickle
 jar is the right place, whereas a cryptic to-be-unpickled string somewhere
 in the docs seems odd to me.

 > Ah, yes, there remains to add a little ref to the ticket in the code
 comments.

 Ahem, I clearly wrote `See trac #16275 and #14793.`

 > Do you want me to do it?

 I'll do it. I have to take care of the simplicial complexes anyway.

 But how to proceed? Shall I make simplicial complexes inherit from
 `CategoryObject` right here, or shall I just silence the underlying error
 and postpone the fix for simplicial complexes?

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16275#comment:34>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" 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-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to