-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 563
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
Bring Doctest coverage for sage/rings/finite_rings to 100% #12262
Comments
Attachment: 12262.patch.gz |
comment:1
Depends on #12062 since that moved functions around in the |
Author: David Roe |
Dependencies: #12062 |
roed's patch rebased for 5.0.beta8 |
Attachment: 12262-rebase.patch.gz Reviewer patch; apply over the rebased v5.0.beta8 patch |
Reviewer: David Loeffler |
comment:2
Attachment: 12262-review.patch.gz Apply 12262-rebase.patch, 12262-review.patch This needed some minor rebasing to apply to 5.0.beta8 (I think because of #11900). Anyway, it's good stuff. I've uploaded my rebased version, and a reviewer patch that doctests one file that somehow escaped, and makes a minor, matter-of-taste change to the doctesting of With both patches installed, every file in |
Changed author from David Roe to David Roe, David Loeffler |
comment:3
The review patch looks good to me. |
Merged: sage-5.0.beta11 |
Part of metaticket #12024. While this ticket doesn't technically depend on #12260 and #12261, those element_ext_pari.py and integer_mod.pyx were split off into those two tickets.
This ticket addresses the files:
Depends on #12062
Component: doctest coverage
Author: David Roe, David Loeffler
Reviewer: David Loeffler
Merged: sage-5.0.beta11
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12262
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: