#8734: make sage variables unique in maxima
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jason | Owner: jason
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: interfaces | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jason Grout, Ralf | Reviewers: Volker Braun, Paul
Stephan | Zimmerman, Karl-Dieter Crisman
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/rws/ticket/8734-1 | 2d31fb12b7a2932624a4ba2b310582d190d70824
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by rws):
Replying to [comment:37 kcrisman]:
> Okay, here are a few questions. I am pretty sure the answers are very
straightforward, but I want to make sure it's clear - in case we might
want to add a doctest, for instance.
Sure, as long as you remember "The perfect is the enemy of the good."
> * Commit be9367 (where you add a try/except clause in `_create`) -
what sort of situation is that catching?
There are several places where maxima.eval() is called and where
exceptions are thrown. This one was simply overlooked, so that change
fixes an unreported bug.
>(Also, did you change all of the doctests with assumptions, or leave a
few just so people see what the full form looks like?)
Yes.
> * Commit ced268 (where you generalized the missing assumptions) -
what situation is that additionally catching? Was that a case of Maxima
asking questions which we didn't catch (and hence doctest) before?
No, it reduces code duplication. Recommended reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_refactoring
> * I assume you are more than happy with Jason's original patch doing the
basic functionality, right?
Yes and no. A lot was missing.
> ...
> So these are pretty minor things and hopefully I'll be able to find some
time for the DE part (or someone else will!) and we'll be on our way! It
certainly looks like you were VERY thorough in finding places that might
cause trouble. The difficulty is that one might miss some places it is
needed because in the absence of adding `_SAGE_VAR_` things should still
work, so one might not know if we missed one. Thanks!
I would assume this is caught by all those doctests using maxima.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/8734#comment:38>
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.
