Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Doctests from Judson's Abstract Algebra textbook #23705

Closed
rbeezer mannequin opened this issue Aug 24, 2017 · 20 comments
Closed

Doctests from Judson's Abstract Algebra textbook #23705

rbeezer mannequin opened this issue Aug 24, 2017 · 20 comments

Comments

@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin

rbeezer mannequin commented Aug 24, 2017

Add roughly 700 doctests from the examples in this undergraduate text. Total CPU time is roughly 7.5 seconds on an ordinary laptop.

Component: doctest coverage

Keywords: days88

Author: Rob Beezer

Branch: 5e9dff8

Reviewer: Vincent Delecroix

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23705

@rbeezer rbeezer mannequin added this to the sage-8.1 milestone Aug 24, 2017
@rbeezer rbeezer mannequin added t: tests labels Aug 24, 2017
@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin Author

rbeezer mannequin commented Aug 25, 2017

@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin Author

rbeezer mannequin commented Aug 25, 2017

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 25, 2017

Commit: 70b170b

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 25, 2017

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

70b170bAdd doctests for Judson's Abstract Algebra textbook

@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin Author

rbeezer mannequin commented Aug 25, 2017

Changed keywords from none to sd88

@rbeezer rbeezer mannequin added the s: needs review label Aug 25, 2017
@videlec
Copy link
Contributor

videlec commented Aug 26, 2017

comment:6

A small patchbot complaint (I have none): the print statements in the documentation should now use python 3 syntax. The following is (almost) wrong

sage: print gap.help('SymmetricGroup', pager=False) # not tested

I agree that this is not tested but the patchbot is not smart enough.

@videlec
Copy link
Contributor

videlec commented Aug 26, 2017

Reviewer: Vincent Delecroix

@videlec
Copy link
Contributor

videlec commented Aug 26, 2017

Changed keywords from sd88 to days88

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 27, 2017

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

5e9dff8Rewrite untested doctest with correct Python3 syntax

@sagetrac-git
Copy link
Mannequin

sagetrac-git mannequin commented Aug 27, 2017

Changed commit from 70b170b to 5e9dff8

@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin Author

rbeezer mannequin commented Aug 27, 2017

comment:9

Thanks, Vincent. I caught 4 other old-style print statements, but missed the untested one. Thanhks very much for looking at this one.

@videlec
Copy link
Contributor

videlec commented Aug 27, 2017

comment:10

Now patchbot is very happy ;-)

@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin Author

rbeezer mannequin commented Aug 27, 2017

comment:11

Merci, Vincent. The patchbot is working much better than it used to! Nice to meet you this past week at SD88.

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented Sep 18, 2017

Changed branch from u/rbeezer/t/23705/doctest-abstract-algebra to 5e9dff8

@koffie
Copy link

koffie commented Sep 26, 2017

comment:13

Hi,

This is giving doctest failures at https://patchbot.sagemath.org/log/23927/Ubuntu/14.04/i686/3.13.0-95-generic/arando/2017-09-25%2021:41:12?short the answers seem to be mathematically correct, and the failures seem to stem from output of nondeterministic algorithms being tested.

@koffie
Copy link

koffie commented Sep 26, 2017

Changed commit from 5e9dff8 to none

@koffie
Copy link

koffie commented Sep 26, 2017

comment:14

This is now #23930

@jdemeyer
Copy link

comment:15

Also trouble in #23544.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

comment:16

Just a question: I noticed that the tests are written as .py files, but they don't contain any Python code at all. So why was the choice made for .py as format, as opposed to .rst for example?

@rbeezer
Copy link
Mannequin Author

rbeezer mannequin commented Oct 2, 2017

comment:17

(I tried to reply by email while traveling - I guess that didn't work.)

There was no particular reason for using *.py and I'd be open to suggestions for better alternatives.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants