On Sunday, November 6, 2016 at 3:12:38 PM UTC-8, Salvatore Stella wrote:
>
> {{{
> if n == 2 and m == 0:
> self.greedy_element = MethodType(greedy_element, self, self.__class__)
> }}}
>
> This has at least one drawback: the documentation produced by Sphinx looks
> weird because these
Dear all,
I am writing to you to ask your opinion on the best way to address two issues
that were raised during the review of #21254. People are quite unhappy on how
these are addressed right now so I figured it would be better to ask for
opinions on how to best implement them.
The first
On Sun, 6 Nov 2016, Jakob Kroeker wrote:
But, If you catched issues for non-corner cases, the challenge is often
to find a minimal/simple failing example, which is often necessary for
successful debugging.
True, but I don't see any easy solution to this. As an example, about two
years ago I
+1
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
> I would also add a crosstesting several functions with known identity.
Good idea.
>Well, my "trivialcase-tester" is just those few lines of code. But as you
> can see from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21741
Will we have to repackage Singular each time we want to upgrade/get the
recent patched release?
I think we should stop repackaging Singular.
If there are some general issues with packaging, we should solve them
upstream.
Jakob
Am Mittwoch, 2. November 2016 16:19:47 UTC+1 schrieb Jean-Pierre
