#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 vdelecroix):
Replying to [comment:21 jdemeyer]:
> Replying to [comment:19 vdelecroix]:
> > 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superseded import deprecation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.
The point is that if this ticket gets merged but not the follow-up
(because you might stop doing Sage development or anything) we will end up
with these two very strange lines.
Could you at least start with a comment
{{{
+ # # we should deprecate this because XYZ.
+ #from sage.misc.superseded import deprecation
+ #deprecation(XXXXX, 'passing -1 as PARI variable is
deprecated, use None
}}}
> > 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.
Right. Doctest are indeed important! What is your long term goal with
those methods?
> > 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.
Just for precision: is `pari_catch_sig_on` just an equivalent to `sig_on`?
If so I really do not understand why there is so much `pari_catch_sig_on`
without any `pari_catch_sig_off`!
> 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.
But I, as a reviewer, do not have your vision of the larger project. I
just see one ticket (actually there is also the part 2 #17860).
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17631#comment:22>
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.
