On 4/1/11 6:18 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
Hi!
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:22:18PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
On 3/31/11 5:59 PM, Daniel Bump wrote:
It seems that your patch has a problem to be applied to the current sage
4.6.2.
The patch was tested with 4.7.alphas (because we
On 1 Apr., 08:43, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
...
It states that this may depend on possible previous computations. Is
there really no work around? Such as, using an object that is not
considered in any other doc test? Is the new result correct? Shouldn't
both tests better be
Hi Simon,
On 1 Apr., 00:09, Anne Schillinga...@math.ucdavis.edu wrote:
I have a question regarding the quotients. If I work in the free algebra
sage: F = FreeAlgebra(QQ,3,'x',implementation='letterplace')
sage: x = F.gens()
sage: p=x[1]*x[0]+x[2]*x[2]
I can iterate over the elements:
sage:
On 2 Apr., 08:39, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
On 1 Apr., 08:43, Simon King simon.k...@uni-jena.de wrote:
...
It states that this may depend on possible previous computations. Is
there really no work around? Such as, using an object that is not
considered in any other doc
On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 12:12:09AM -0700, Simon King wrote:
It states that this may depend on possible previous computations. Is
there really no work around? Such as, using an object that is not
considered in any other doc test? Is the new result correct? Shouldn't
both tests better be
Hi Nicolas,
On 2 Apr., 18:31, Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr
wrote:
Well, I guess the right thing to do would be to change the doctest to
not show the full cache of this function, but only those pieces that
should be there at this point. Do you feel comfortable doing it, or
would
