#16331: Game Theory: Build capacity to solve matching games in to Sage.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vinceknight | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: game theory | Resolution:
Keywords: Game Theory, | Merged in:
Matching Games, | Reviewers: Karl-Dieter Crisman,
Authors: Vince Knight, | Travis Scrimshaw
James Campbell | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 17748d15c0b0c11044fb7696022d4143fe1056e4
u/vinceknight/game_theory__build_capacity_to_solve_matching_games_in_to_sage_|
Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by vinceknight):
Replying to [comment:106 vinceknight]:
> Replying to [comment:105 kcrisman]:
> > Thanks, looks good. However, I would not be AT ALL surprised if at
least some people have problems with doctests with the ones which have
dicts as output, for the reasons I just mentioned. Like so:
> > {{{
> > sage: D = {1:2, 2:3} # possibly random order depending on hashing
> > sage: sorted(D.items()) # guaranteed
> > [(1, 2), (2, 3)]
> > }}}
> >
> > See also #17362.
>
> Ah! That's very helpful: so I should go back and changed the dictionary
outputs to that? I'll do that today at some point.
Just reran the tests on my linux box and they all failed (fresh build of
Sage from `develop`). Will rewrite all the dictionary tests.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16331#comment:107>
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.
