Ticket #9685 (closed defect: fixed)
constructor for the all ones matrix
| Reported by: | rlm | Owned by: | was |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-4.6.1 |
| Component: | user interface | Keywords: | |
| Cc: | jdemeyer | Work issues: | |
| Report Upstream: | N/A | Reviewers: | Felix Lawrence |
| Authors: | Robert Miller | Merged in: | sage-4.6.1.alpha1 |
| Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
Attachments
-
trac_9685.patch
(2.3 KB) -
added by rlm 3 years ago.
-
trac_9685-rebased.patch
(2.3 KB) -
added by flawrence 3 years ago.
- rebased version of original patch
Change History
comment:2 Changed 3 years ago by flawrence
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
- Reviewers set to Felix Lawrence
Worked for me and behaves consistently with similar functions such as zero_matrix(). The sparse matrix option is not too useful here (since the matrix gets filled with ones), but I guess it's best to be consistent with similar functions, which the patch is.
comment:3 Changed 3 years ago by jdemeyer
- Status changed from positive_review to needs_work
When applying this to sage-4.6.1.alpha0, I get
patching file sage/matrix/constructor.py Hunk #1 succeeded at 1348 with fuzz 2 (offset 363 lines).
So the patch succeeds, but it's probably better if it gets rebased properly.
comment:4 follow-up: ↓ 5 Changed 3 years ago by flawrence
If I rebased it, would someone else then have to review it?
comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 3 years ago by jdemeyer
- Cc jdemeyer added
Replying to flawrence:
If I rebased it, would someone else then have to review it?
I could easily review your rebasing.
Changed 3 years ago by flawrence
-
attachment
trac_9685-rebased.patch
added
rebased version of original patch
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
