On Saturday, July 9, 2016 at 12:37:15 PM UTC-4, Jakob Kroeker wrote:
>
> I think backward compatibility is a strong argument to keep returning True.
>>
>
> well, there is also the option to deprecate the is_connected() function
> for the empty graph
> and then change the behaviour after a year.
the ticket https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15114 seems orphan now...
Am Donnerstag, 20. März 2014 12:58:30 UTC+1 schrieb Marco Streng:
>
> Thanks for all the replies. It seems that everybody here agrees to
> disallow coercions from RR to RIF, which is all that ticket
>
Hello,
today in my spare free time I continued looking for tickets with describes
issues where sage silently returns a wrong answer and stopped at
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15325
For the following tickets I'm not sure,
if they should be classified as 'silently incorrect result' or
> If a ticket describes an issue where sage silently returns a wrong answer,
> please update the ticket description, adding a 'wrongAnswerLabel' to the
> stopgap field.
>
> Please don't. That field is suppose to be used for tickets which implement
the stopgap when it is applicable (which it
On Friday, July 8, 2016 at 3:39:59 AM UTC-5, Jori Mäntysalo wrote:
>
> What is wrong with https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20980 ?
>
> The branch field is red, but I think I did nothing unusual. Also I got an
> error message about mails not sent when setting it to needs_review.
>
>
>
Also,
>
> I think backward compatibility is a strong argument to keep returning True.
>
well, there is also the option to deprecate the is_connected() function for
the empty graph
and then change the behaviour after a year.
By the way, what about defining that the empty graph is connected AND
using a keyword the ticket will not added to the list of mathematically
wrong answers.
It is about make silent wrong answers _visible_. Stopgaps are an extreme
tool and are hard to enforce.
Also I do not (yet) have the time to create 72 stopgaps and nobody else
seems to care.
Jakob
Am
Hello,
I did a bugfix in #20513 that was requested on sage-support (I consider
this as an up-vote ;-). But no reviewer is on it. I would be delighted
if somebody would take two minutes for the review.
Vincent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On 09/07/16 18:17, Jakob Kroeker wrote:
Please don't. That field is suppose to be used for tickets which implement
the stopgap when it is applicable
Unfortunately stopgaps for all the silent wrong results will hardly be
accepted.
I already experienced heavy opposition as I created some and
>
> Please don't. That field is suppose to be used for tickets which implement
> the stopgap when it is applicable
Unfortunately stopgaps for all the silent wrong results will hardly be
accepted.
I already experienced heavy opposition as I created some and was not able
to create them in full
10 matches
Mail list logo
