[sage-devel] Re: SageMath GSoC 2024

2024-02-21 Thread Matthias Koeppe
Thanks, Travis, for sharing this great news here. One recent change in the GSoC program, perhaps important for the Sage project, may have been overlooked in the past. GSoC is open not just to "students" but also to "open source beginners" -- without any age limit or any restriction regarding

[sage-devel] Re: int vs long in cython

2024-02-21 Thread Nils Bruin
I tried removal here: https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37420 and as expected it looks like it's working fine. On Wednesday 21 February 2024 at 19:06:50 UTC-8 Nils Bruin wrote: > well, I don't expect the C compiler to be smart enough to recognise the > second is an "elif False:", so the

[sage-devel] Re: int vs long in cython

2024-02-21 Thread Nils Bruin
well, I don't expect the C compiler to be smart enough to recognise the second is an "elif False:", so the "hurt" would be in additional code executed. Plus, having hidden "elif False:"s in a code base is a really bad code smell, so I think there is a penalty. What do you want to guard

[sage-devel] SageMath GSoC 2024

2024-02-21 Thread Travis Scrimshaw
Hi everyone, SageMath has been accepted this year as a mentor organization for Google's Summer of Code (GSoC) 2024! You can find information regarding our proposed projects and information on how to apply available on https://wiki.sagemath.org/GSoC/2024 There is still time if you want to

[sage-devel] Re: int vs long in cython

2024-02-21 Thread Travis Scrimshaw
I think so, but it might not hurt to have it. Best, Travis On Thursday, February 22, 2024 at 9:54:32 AM UTC+9 Nils Bruin wrote: > I noticed the following cython code > > if S is long: > return sage.rings.integer.long_to_Z() > elif S is int: > return

[sage-devel] int vs long in cython

2024-02-21 Thread Nils Bruin
I noticed the following cython code if S is long: return sage.rings.integer.long_to_Z() elif S is int: return sage.rings.integer.int_to_Z()

Re: [sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

2024-02-21 Thread Sebastian Oehms
> *By the way, an author of a PR needs also the ability to remove "needs work". Hence the author needs to be in the Triage team anyway in our workflow. * Not necessarily! If the *synchronizing trigger* is enabled then the bot would change needs work to needs review on a non draft PR each time a

[sage-devel] Re: One year of Sage development on GitHub

2024-02-21 Thread Kwankyu Lee
On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 12:26:50 PM UTC+9 Matthias Koeppe wrote: Can the status label sync workflow help with this transition, without getting in the way? For example, when the _author_ removes the "needs review" label (without setting "positive review"), set the PR to "draft"?