#17631: Auto-generate gen.pyx -- part 1
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
       Reporter:         |        Owner:
  jdemeyer               |       Status:  needs_info
           Type:         |    Milestone:  sage-6.5
  enhancement            |   Resolution:
       Priority:  major  |    Merged in:
      Component:         |    Reviewers:  Vincent Delecroix
  interfaces             |  Work issues:
       Keywords:         |       Commit:
        Authors:         |  a5a6b25ad3c322c03cec85b6c85da4fcb5508cdf
  Jeroen Demeyer         |     Stopgaps:
Report Upstream:  N/A    |
         Branch:         |
  u/jdemeyer/17631       |
   Dependencies:         |
  #16997                 |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment (by jdemeyer):

 Replying to [comment:19 vdelecroix]:
 > I am a bit worried since the auto generated files do not get any doctest
 in them...
 That's true. On the other hand, I did not ''remove'' any doctests either,
 so it's a least status quo. PARI itself has quite an extensive test suite
 (run if you install PARI with `SAGE_CHECK=yes` or with `./sage -i -c
 pari`).

 > What is that in `src/sage/libs/pari/pari_instance.pyx`?
 > {{{
 > +            #from sage.misc.superseded import deprecation
 > +            #deprecation(XXXXX, 'passing -1 as PARI variable is
 deprecated, use None instead')
 > }}}
 It's basically a reminder to myself that this really should be deprecated.

 > Why did you keep so much methods in the `gen` class in `gen.pyx` (such
 as `List`, `Mat`, `sign`, `vecmin`, `vecmax`, etc)?
 In any case, I didn't want to remove any doctests. I also didn't check
 very carefully which methods could be removed.

 > Where can I found the implementation and/or documentation of
 `pari_catch_sig_on` and co?
 See `src/sage/libs/pari/pari_err.pxi`. But `pari_catch_sig_on()` and
 `pari_catch_sig_off` are just `sig_on()` and `sig_off`. This used to be
 different before we had #14894.

 Most of your comments are indeed good comments, but my first priority was
 to get the general framework (i.e. this ticket) reviewed, we can still
 improve things later. I prefer to split tickets in smaller pieces, I
 dislike these huge tickets which do everything.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17631#comment:21>
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