Hi Frédéric, all,
Regarding
> * There remains to make a proper python3 install setup, in order to make it
> easier to debug. Currently, "make" with "SAGE_PYTHON3=yes" always rebuilds
> everything, which is *very annoying*. Happily, using only "sage -b" take
> much less time. For instance, an acce
Looking at this more closely. Why isn’t the “bytes” conversion
done earlier - before checking that the file exists. Is there
a reason why the string is converted before dl-opening the library?
> On 7/08/2017, at 18:51, François Bissey wrote:
>
>> On 7/08/2017, at 18:23, Frédéric Chapoton wrote
Hi,
Le 07/08/2017 à 11:54, Erik Bray a écrit :
> I'm working on a better solution to this as part of a more general
> reworking of how Sage's dist handles dependencies that can be
> fulfilled by multiple packages (in this case the dependency being
> 'python'--specifically the Python used for Sage
On 2017-08-04 10:49, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
Indeed, this is a subtle issue
Cython thinks that F is a sequence because Family does support the
sequence protocol (this is lost somewhere in the macro
__Pyx_GetItemInt). As a consequence, Cython translates a negative index
"-i" into "len(sequence)
On 2017-08-07 12:00, François Bissey wrote:
Looking at this more closely. Why isn’t the “bytes” conversion
done earlier - before checking that the file exists.
+1
I know that Erik Bray will disagree with this, but I would advocate to
use "bytes" as much as possible when dealing with filenames
The core-dumped is supposed to be fixed by the pynac upgrading
ticket https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23325 . So it does not require any
further work hopefuly.
Le lundi 7 août 2017 11:54:14 UTC+2, Erik Bray a écrit :
>
> Hi Frédéric, all,
>
> Regarding
>
> > * There remains to make a proper p
It is a Cython bug.
Most simple example:
sage: %%cython
: def get(obj, int i):
: return obj[i]
sage: class D(dict): pass
sage: d = D([(-1, "hello")]); d
{-1: 'hello'}
sage: get(d, -1)
...
KeyError: 0
sage: d[-1]
'hello'
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
See https://github.com/cython/cython/issues/1807
--
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, se
The simplest workaround is to use F[i] instead of F[i]
--
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 gro
On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 3:40:07 PM UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Binaries for OSX 10.12.6 are at
> http://files.sagemath.org/osx/intel/index.html
>
> May also work on older versions of OSX, but I have no way of testing
>
I just tested it.
The OSX 10.12.6 binary does not work on OSX 10
Is this behavior new? I got it on my MacBook running the latest development
version. And, more importantly, what is the recommended way of writing
doctests for functions that return frozen sets with strings and integers?
In particular in light of Python 3 coming up...
sage: sorted([1,2,'a'])
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2017-08-07 12:00, François Bissey wrote:
>>
>> Looking at this more closely. Why isn’t the “bytes” conversion
>> done earlier - before checking that the file exists.
>
>
> +1
>
> I know that Erik Bray will disagree with this, but I would
This does seem to be new. In Sage 7.2 (just one that I had handy),
sage: sorted([1,2,'a'])
[1, 2, 'a']
sage: sorted([1r,2r,'a'])
[1, 2, 'a']
This isn't that surprising, since the semantics of comparison have been
changing because of the upcoming switch to python 3. But I think that Sage
integers
On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
integers should compare the same as python ints
I agree and with Python 3 you get an error
$ python
Python 3.6.2 (default, Jul 20 2017, 03:52:27)
[GCC 7.1.1 20170630] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
>
>> integers should compare the same as python ints
>>
> I agree and with Python 3 you get an error
>
> $ python
> Python 3.6.2 (default, Jul 20 201
On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
integers should compare the same as python ints
I agree and with Python 3 you get an error
$ python
Pytho
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
>> 20100.delecr...@gmail.com
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
>
On 07/08/2017 23:11, David Roe wrote:
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
20100.delecr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> Bu
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 23:11, David Roe wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
>> 20100.delecr...@gmail.com
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2
> What bad practice are you referring to? The output of some functions are
> lists where the ordering is somewhat unpredictable. This different
> ordering can reveal itself in testing on different platforms, or with a
> changed package that Sage depends on. Yet for a user looking at the
>
Here's a status report from playing around with it for a few days.
* I find it pretty interesting to watch the feeds of everything that's
happening on trac (you can also just focus on a single component).
* I think that it will be quite useful for having online Sage Days, which
have happened at va
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017, David Roe wrote:
Yet for a user looking at the examples of using such a function, it's nicer to
see
sage: my_func(inputs) # unordered
[A, C, B]
rather than
sage: set([str(c) for c in my_func(inputs)]) == set(["A","B","C"])
True
Maybe just
EXAMPLES::
sage: my_func(
On 2017-08-07 22:53, David Roe wrote:
> >>> sorted([1,2,'a'])
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "", line 1, in
> TypeError: '<' not supported between instances of 'str' and 'int'
> [...]
> Which still leaves the second part of Stefan's question: how do we get
> consiste
23 matches
Mail list logo