#7377: Symbolic Ring to Maxima via EclObject
-----------------------------------------------------------------------+----
Reporter: nbruin |
Owner: nbruin
Type: enhancement |
Status: needs_review
Priority: major |
Milestone: sage-feature
Component: symbolics |
Keywords:
Author: Nils Bruin, Jean-Pierre Flori |
Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: Jean-Pierre Flori, François Bissey, Karl-Dieter Crisman |
Merged:
Work_issues: |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------+----
Comment(by jpflori):
Replying to [comment:116 kcrisman]:
> Sorry I do not have time to check this properly today. Do you get the
` ERROR: An unexpected error occurred while tokenizing input The following
traceback may be corrupted or invalid ` problem with these patches? I
hope not :)
I do not get that one.
> A couple very small points about the doctests patch, which by the way is
nontrivial and nice all by itself. * You should have a
`loads(dumps(foo))==foo` test if possible for class definitions. I think
there are eight of these? * You probably don't need to put `INPUT` and/or
`OUTPUT` blocks if there isn't one or it's essentially stated in the first
line of the documentation - I'm thinking of `_false_symbol` or `version`.
Up to you, of course, since you already did it. * In a few places where
you have more than 'really basic and stupid' documentation (you sell
yourself short! it's not bad at all) you have some lines that aren't going
to work. Ones like ` - use_disk_cache - boolean (default: True); if set
to True, try to read cached result from disk ` are too long, and should
be made into two lines like you did for ` - eqns - a list of m strings;
each representing a linear question in m = n variables ` However, these
will cause a problem in Sphinx, I think, unless you reformat them like so
` - eqns - a list of m strings; each representing a linear question in m
= n variables ` This won't show up well on Trac, but notice that the 'q'
in 'question' is lined up with the first '`' in '``eqns``'. This was
correctly done for 'pts_list', for example.
I was not aware of line length limitation, I'll have a look at that
tonight. For the eqns one, you are right, I just forgot to indent it
correctly.
For the INPUT and OUTPUT blocks, I just tried to follow
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/conventions.html as much as possible
to get something consistent even if it is often redundant or empty.
> It looks like the `zunderflow zz` was fixed as well, and assuming that
fix passes tests as well, I think it can be 'needs review'. In fact, as
long as everyone involved is not reviewing their own patch, this can even
be 'positive review'. For instance, I will assume that JP slightly
changing my reviewer patch indicates no problems with it. Can anyone
say what would still need to be done for positive review, other than
passing all long doctests, which I can't check right now, and taking care
of the things above which will lead to Sphinx errors?
It is fixed because I changed the check to something else.
The real problem is that this test gives a somewhat random output
according to when it is run.
So I guess the problem, if there is one, does not lie in the test used
now, but in the implementation of the function itself.
See http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7377#comment:106 I guess we
could open another ticket if we want to change the current behavior.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7377#comment:118>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
