#8334: Improvements to residue fields
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Reporter: roed | Owner: AlexGhitza
Type: enhancement | Status: closed
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.6
Component: algebra | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: | Work_issues:
Upstream: N/A | Reviewer: David Loeffler
Author: David Roe | Merged: sage-4.6.alpha2
Dependencies: |
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Changes (by zimmerma):
* cc: was (added)
Comment:
David (Loeffler), I didn't write to you, but to David Roe... You are just
the reviewer.
This policy is explained in http://groups.google.com/group/sage-
support/msg/3ea7ed2eeab0824a :
{{{
Note that you could also submit a patch to Sage with the code you're
doctesting.
I did that with all the tests from both of the books I published, and
I encourage you and many others to do the same with the code from your
article. The code would go in a file
devel/sage/sage/tests/
like the file devel/sage/sage/tests/book_stein_modform.py
In fact, I could imagine having dozens of files in that directory, and
when doctests break there, we could notify the authors before
releasing the version of Sage that breaks their doctests for feedback
-- then they could update their papers or Sage.
}}}
My personal opinion is that "we could notify" should read "we should
notify"...
Paul
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8334#comment:31>
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.
