Re: [sage-devel] spkgs dependencies graph

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:18 PM Thierry wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:38:51PM +, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:53 PM Vincent Delecroix > > <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I hope it is a poset :-) > > > > for purposes of modularisation, we need some

Re: [sage-devel] Re: python3 status report

Hi, On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 11:21:21AM -0800, David Coudert wrote: [...] > The most complicated issue is certainly edges of Graph: we sort the > vertices of an edge before returning it... I have no solution for this > issue. We can decide to stop ordering the vertices, but then we will have >

[sage-devel] Re: spkgs dependencies graph

Cool, and then you can call Poset(digraph_spkg()). On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 12:56:07 PM UTC-8, Frédéric Chapoton wrote: > > Quick tentative, not smooth: > > from sage.misc.package import * > > > > > def digraph_spkg(): > """ > digraph > """ > opts = {} > > > local =

[sage-devel] Re: spkgs dependencies graph

Quick tentative, not smooth: from sage.misc.package import * def digraph_spkg(): """ digraph """ opts = {} local = opts.pop('local', False) ignore_URLError = opts.pop('ignore_URLError', False) exclude_pip = opts.pop('exclude_pip', False) if opts:

[sage-devel] Re: documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Vincent, Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending > on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, > a sphinx repo, etc). > > 1) When a user performs `sage -pip install X`, should the documentation > be compiled and installed? > I

Re: [sage-devel] Re: documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 10:28:17 AM UTC-8, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > > Given how much crap nowadays google returns for seemingly meaningful > searches, this is quite a waste of time to do. > I agree it's a waste of time to do searches that are only seemingly meaningful. I think you

Re: [sage-devel] spkgs dependencies graph

Hi, On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:38:51PM +, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:53 PM Vincent Delecroix > <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I hope it is a poset :-) > > for purposes of modularisation, we need some kind of dependency resolution, > and > the question is

Re: [sage-devel] Re: documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Last but not the least, MMa's come with documentation bundles - for a good reason. And Sage's doc website relies on docs built by sphinx, and neglecting them already produced a mess there, which needs to be fixed, obviously not by hand. On Tue, 29 Jan 2019 18:28 Dima Pasechnik On Tue, Jan 29,

Re: [sage-devel] spkgs dependencies graph

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:53 PM Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I hope it is a poset :-) for purposes of modularisation, we need some kind of dependency resolution, and the question is whether it's too much trouble to do ad hoc, by hand. E.g. imagine one wants to use a

Re: [sage-devel] spkgs dependencies graph

I hope it is a poset :-) Le 29/01/2019 à 19:44, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : Has anyone written code to compute it? (and create a Sage graph out of it, maybe) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop

[sage-devel] spkgs dependencies graph

Has anyone written code to compute it? (and create a Sage graph out of it, maybe) -- 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

Re: [sage-devel] Re: documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:11 PM Nils Bruin wrote: > > On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 12:34:39 AM UTC-8, vdelecroix wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending >> on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, >> a

Re: [sage-devel] #27071: Recommendations on naming convention and _repr_

Le 29/01/2019 à 17:25, TB a écrit : On 29/01/2019 11:16, jplab wrote: Another question: is there a preferred convention in sage for "number of ...". For Polyhedra they start with `n_` while for graphs they start with `num_` Thanks, J-P There is also the more explicit "number_of_" used in

Re: [sage-devel] Re: documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Le 29/01/2019 à 19:10, Nils Bruin a écrit : On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 12:34:39 AM UTC-8, vdelecroix wrote: Dear all, Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, a sphinx repo, etc). 1)

[sage-devel] Re: documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 12:34:39 AM UTC-8, vdelecroix wrote: > > Dear all, > > Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending > on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, > a sphinx repo, etc). > > 1) When a user performs `sage -pip

Re: [sage-devel] #27071: Recommendations on naming convention and _repr_

On 29/01/2019 11:16, jplab wrote: Another question: is there a preferred convention in sage for "number of ...". For Polyhedra they start with `n_` while for graphs they start with `num_` Thanks, J-P There is also the more explicit "number_of_" used in several places, which I like. One

Re: [sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 4:48 PM Thierry wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 09:32:58AM +0100, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending > > on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, >

Re: [sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Hi, On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 09:32:58AM +0100, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > Dear all, > > Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending > on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, > a sphinx repo, etc). > > 1) When a user performs `sage -pip

[sage-devel] Help wanted to diagnose a system-dependent bug : R lost its graphics abilities

See Trac#27163 for details. In short : I can't get R graphics abilities on a Debian testing (a. k. a. buster) system, whereas Doma Pasechnik can't reproduce my problem on a Debian stretch (a. k. a. stretch) system. The critical point is to check that,

Re: [sage-devel] Re: python3 status report

On 2019-01-27 14:50, Simon King wrote: > How to do so most easily, so that "git pull" etc. still referes to trac? > That was part of my question. Doing "git pull > /path/to/my/old/installation" would mean that I need to go to my old > installation, "git pull" (pulls develop from trac), go to the

[sage-devel] "pypersist" - persistent memoisation in Python

Hi all, I've recently been working on OpenDreamKit Task 6.9 , Memoisation and production of new data, in time for Deliverable 6.9 at the end of February. I've now produced a

Re: [sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Le 29/01/2019 à 10:50, Dima Pasechnik a écrit : On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:40 AM Jeroen Demeyer wrote: On 2019-01-29 09:32, Vincent Delecroix wrote: 1) When a user performs `sage -pip install X`, should the documentation be compiled and installed? I'm pretty sure that the answer is

[sage-devel] link sphinx docs: #27164

I've opened https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27164 to track the issues related to links to sagetex, sagenb, cypari, cysignals, pyppl etc. It is also important to have the doc.sagemath.org website in a good shape... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:40 AM Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2019-01-29 09:32, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > > 1) When a user performs `sage -pip install X`, should the documentation > > be compiled and installed? > > I'm pretty sure that the answer is "no" for most Python packages. I see > two

[sage-devel] Re: python3 status report

Le mardi 29 janvier 2019 10:29:43 UTC+1, Samuel Lelievre a écrit : > > Sun 2019-01-27 14:23:08 UTC+1, Frédéric Chapoton: > > > > > > STATEMENT: I would to advocate that *every developer switch to python3 > NOW*. > > > > > > Please vote! > > Strong +1 from me. > > +1 from me too. Many, many

[sage-devel] Re: python3 status report

Sun 2019-01-27 14:23:08 UTC+1, Frédéric Chapoton: > > here is a small progress report on porting sage to python3. > Good, but still too slow for my taste. The sooner we can > catch up with jupyter, the better.. > > (1) with the latest beta (8.7.b1), there are now exactly 200 files > having failing

[sage-devel] #27071: Recommendations on naming convention and _repr_

Hello, In the ticket: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/27071 We implement the method `ambient_V_indices` for faces of polyhedron to get a grip of the indices of faces of polyhedron, which were not yet easily accessible. At the same time, I suggest a change to the `_repr_` function to make it

Re: [sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Le 29/01/2019 à 09:40, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit : On 2019-01-29 09:32, Vincent Delecroix wrote: 1) When a user performs `sage -pip install X`, should the documentation be compiled and installed? I'm pretty sure that the answer is "no" for most Python packages. The user might want to

Re: [sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

On 2019-01-29 09:32, Vincent Delecroix wrote: 1) When a user performs `sage -pip install X`, should the documentation be compiled and installed? I'm pretty sure that the answer is "no" for most Python packages. I see two reasons for this: - there is no easy and obvious way to integrate

[sage-devel] documentation of SageMath (Python) packages

Dear all, Imagine I have a Python module, typically hosted on PyPI and depending on SageMath, that provides documentation in some form (e.g. a pdf file, a sphinx repo, etc). 1) When a user performs `sage -pip install X`, should the documentation be compiled and installed? If the answer is