#10295: Upgrading pexpect
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: was
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.7
Component: interfaces | Resolution:
Keywords: pexpect upgrade | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/fbissey/pexpect3.3 | a24eab3ce985874ab8445ed5e362bbeead76fd40
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by leif):
Replying to [comment:27 bpage]:
> What is the recommended way to measure Sage performance?
Good question, I can only talk about the command line interface:
Of course there's `time ./sage -t --long src/sage/interfaces/` (probably
with `-p`; one can also set `SAGE_TEST_ITER` and `SAGE_TEST_GLOBAL_ITER`).
Only testing the interfaces that actually use pexpect (and where the
external program is really installed) makes more sense.
Tests that make heavy use of (stand-alone) Maxima/`ecl`, Singular, `gap`
and `gp` are meaningful as well. I cannot really list them right now, but
`src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/` and especially
`src/sage/sandpiles/sandpile.py` are known to fall into that category
IIRC.
Before testing, it IMHO makes sense to remove or rename
`$DOT_SAGE/timings*.json`, otherwise doctests will get reordered with
undesirable impact on the resource usage, influencing the measured
timings.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10295#comment:28>
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.
