#17898: Removal of wrong stopgap
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: aschilling | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.6
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: stopgap, | Merged in:
partitions | Reviewers: Travis Scrimshaw
Authors: Anne Schilling | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 39142901893bc0207e8271ccd4772469fe958e0f
public/ticket/17898 | Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by aschilling):
Replying to [comment:7 dimpase]:
> Replying to [comment:4 tscrim]:
> > Bad input is not a bug. Ever.
> in your own private code it will only shoot you in the foot.
>
> As it is a non-private function is should check that the input is
correct. Otherwise it has potential to do a lot of damage to other people.
>
> I am sure you would scream "Bug!" upon finding an incorrect Python
expression that Python runs without any warnings.
The stopgap that is currently in Sage now pops up all over Sage in
situations where IntegerListsLex is used within the range of parameters
and hence totally fine. It just scares users unnecessarily. Also, it does
not point the user to the documentation where the limitations are listed.
Hence the current stopgap in Sage, in my opinion, does more harm than
good!
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17898#comment:8>
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.
