Replacement of sage/libs/ppl.pyx by pplpy

Question

Replacement of sage/libs/ppl.pyx by pplpy

vinklein opened this issue 8 years ago · 255 comments

The Sage wrappers around ppl are now superseded by the standalone pplpy (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace src/sage/libs/ppl.pyx extension with pplpy. For this, we

create a new standard package pplpy
upgrade gmpy2 from optional to standard
replace the Sage code calling sage/libs/ppl.pyx to call pplpy
make appropriate deprecation for sage.libs.ppl

Tarball for pplpy: pplpy-0.8.4.tar.gz

Upstream: Reported upstream. Developers acknowledge bug.

CC: @videlec @kiwifb @embray @slel

Component: packages: standard

Keywords: thursdaysbdx, ppl, pplpy, upgrade

Author: Vincent Klein

Branch: 829317e

Reviewer: Dima Pasechnik, François Bissey, Vincent Delecroix, Jeroen Demeyer, Erik Bray

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23024

Answer 1 · 2017-05-18T12:31:21.000Z

Changed dependencies from #229 to #22928

Answer 2 · 2017-05-23T14:31:51.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-Remove ppl.pyx extension and replace with pplpy[https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) package.
+The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) is now superseded by the stand alone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy.
 
 Some steps :
 - list any ticket proposing to extend ppl functionalities in Sage (if yes, open issues on github with cross links)

Answer 3 · 2017-05-23T14:32:09.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) is now superseded by the stand alone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy.
+The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) is now superseded by the stand alone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (!Python/!Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy.
 
 Some steps :
 - list any ticket proposing to extend ppl functionalities in Sage (if yes, open issues on github with cross links)

Answer 4 · 2017-06-07T07:40:12.000Z

Branch: u/vklein/replacement_of_sage_libs_ppl_pyx_by_pplpy

Answer 5 · 2017-06-07T07:41:38.000Z

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

`f8bf274`	`Updating checksum for pplpy pkg`

Answer 6 · 2017-06-07T07:41:38.000Z

Commit: f8bf274

Answer 7 · 2017-06-07T07:52:09.000Z

comment:7

For testing purpose you can use the following tarball of pplpy (outdated, use the one in the ticket's description)

Answer 8 · 2017-06-07T10:24:06.000Z

comment:8

Salut Vincent,

Your branch appears in red which means that there are merge issues (possibly trivial). Would be better to rebase it on the latest beta.

Answer 9 · 2017-06-07T11:09:30.000Z

comment:9

Pickling should be fixed

-        sage: TestSuite(Asso).run()
+        sage: TestSuite(Asso).run(skip='_test_pickling')

It works with pplpy used from Python

>>> x = ppl.Variable(0)
>>> y = ppl.Variable(1)
>>> z = ppl.Variable(2)
>>> gs.insert(ppl.point(x+y+2*z))
>>> gs.insert(ppl.point(x-y))
>>> gs.insert(ppl.point(z))
>>> P = ppl.C_Polyhedron(gs)
>>> import pickle
>>> pickle.loads(pickle.dumps(P)) == P
True

I don't see the point of the function mpz_to_sage_integer. You can just do [Integer(x) for x in my_mpz_list]. For example

v_coords = (1,) + tuple(mpz_to_sage_integer(v.coefficients()))

can be replaced by

v_coords = (1,) + tuple(Integer(c) for c in v.coefficients())

Moreover, the name is confusing since the fuction converts a list of mpz integers.

Some possible simplifications

In ppl_backend.pyx:
Integer(g.coefficient(Variable(variable))) / Integer(g.divisor()) ->
Rational(g.coefficient(Variable(variable)) / g.divisor())
In ppl_lattice_polytope.py: assert Integer(v.divisor()).is_one() -> assert v.divisor() == 1

Answer 10 · 2017-06-07T14:23:52.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

`f19f81e`	`Integer and rational constructors support gmpy2 params`
`cd8ef5d`	`remove OptionalExtension sage.libs.gmpy2`
`8ced5d3`	`remove get_gmpy2_path()`
`674fe62`	`Add few doctests`
`2ed4f95`	`Use of MPZ_Check and MPQ_Check functions from gmpy2 C-API`
`b4f0c26`	`Add pplpy as a standard package`
`257c330`	`Replace sage.libs.ppl with pplpy package`
`636051f`	`Remove sage.libs.ppl extension`
`f52b3d4`	`Modify associahedron doctest`
`dffa134`	`Updating checksum for pplpy pkg`

Answer 11 · 2017-06-07T14:23:52.000Z

Changed commit from f8bf274 to dffa134

Answer 12 · 2017-06-07T15:40:43.000Z

comment:11

Replying to @videlec:

Some possible simplifications

In ppl_backend.pyx:
Integer(g.coefficient(Variable(variable))) / Integer(g.divisor()) ->
Rational(g.coefficient(Variable(variable)) / g.divisor())

In ppl_lattice_polytope.py: assert Integer(v.divisor()).is_one() -> assert v.divisor() == 1

It will be nice, but coercion for gmpy2 types is required for doing this (#23052).

Answer 13 · 2017-06-07T15:49:37.000Z

Changed commit from dffa134 to b3563eb

Answer 14 · 2017-06-07T15:49:37.000Z

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

`b3563eb`	`remove mpz_to_sage_integer function`

Answer 15 · 2017-06-07T20:46:51.000Z

comment:13

Replying to @vinklein:

Replying to @videlec:

Some possible simplifications

In ppl_backend.pyx:
Integer(g.coefficient(Variable(variable))) / Integer(g.divisor()) ->
Rational(g.coefficient(Variable(variable)) / g.divisor())

In ppl_lattice_polytope.py: assert Integer(v.divisor()).is_one() -> assert v.divisor() == 1

It will be nice, but coercion for gmpy2 types is required for doing this (#23052).

Where? The first involves a direct call Rational(mpq_type) and the second comparison between mpz and Python integer. Which operation is mixing gmpy2 types with Sage types?

Answer 16 · 2017-06-08T08:44:17.000Z

comment:14

Replying to @videlec:

Where? The first involves a direct call Rational(mpq_type) and the second comparison between mpz and Python integer. Which operation is mixing gmpy2 types with Sage types?

You're right, tests failures in ppl_backend.pyx with the suggested code are not coercion related. Forget my previous comment.

Answer 17 · 2017-06-08T18:00:30.000Z

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

`3785bf4`	`assert simplification ppl_lattice_polytope.py`
`d3875e7`	`remove skip=('_test_pickling') option for pplpy polyhedron`

Answer 18 · 2017-06-08T18:00:30.000Z

Changed commit from b3563eb to d3875e7

Answer 19 · 2017-06-08T18:04:05.000Z

comment:16

As pplpy has evolved to fix pickling with cPickle download pplpy again to update your local package.

Answer 20 · 2017-06-09T14:04:33.000Z

Changed commit from d3875e7 to 7ae21f5

Answer 21 · 2017-06-09T14:04:33.000Z

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

`700f72c`	`remove sage/libs/ppl from doctree`
`7ae21f5`	`trac 23024 Bullet list indentation correction`

Answer 22 · 2017-06-15T12:48:03.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. Last 10 new commits:

`08c7a72`	`Add path of gmpy2 in include_dirs`
`359a0ff`	`update checksum and package version`
`0d4fd2e`	`Integer and rational constructors support gmpy2 params`
`7c66a7c`	`remove OptionalExtension sage.libs.gmpy2`
`d143dde`	`remove get_gmpy2_path()`
`2c56a3f`	`Add few doctests`
`e5264fd`	`Use of MPZ_Check and MPQ_Check functions from gmpy2 C-API`
`504ab68`	`Change way of creating a Rational from a mpz`
`072a15c`	`add __mpz__() to Rational`
`858c2e5`	`trac 23024 update pplpy checksum`

Answer 23 · 2017-06-15T12:48:03.000Z

Changed commit from 7ae21f5 to 858c2e5

Answer 24 · 2017-06-15T13:02:06.000Z

comment:19

As pplpy has evolved to fix pickling with cPickle download pplpy again to update your local package.

Answer 25 · 2017-11-16T17:03:48.000Z

Changed dependencies from #22928 to #22928, #23309

Answer 26 · 2017-11-17T15:31:49.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

`1c1b971`	`Replace sage.libs.ppl with pplpy package`
`2a1798e`	`Remove sage.libs.ppl extension`
`d1b0b2f`	`Modify associahedron doctest`
`db21e1d`	`Updating checksum for pplpy pkg`
`eb215c3`	`remove mpz_to_sage_integer function`
`53f30f3`	`assert simplification ppl_lattice_polytope.py`
`f9a6415`	`remove skip=('_test_pickling') option for pplpy polyhedron`
`924984c`	`remove sage/libs/ppl from doctree`
`ce863ff`	`update checksum, snapshot version update in setup.py`
`7a5812a`	`Add path of gmpy2 in include_dirs`

Answer 27 · 2017-11-17T15:31:49.000Z

Changed commit from 858c2e5 to 7a5812a

Answer 28 · 2017-11-24T14:59:46.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) is now superseded by the stand alone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (!Python/!Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy.
 
 Some steps :
+- pplpy and gmpy2 must be standard packages.
 - list any ticket proposing to extend ppl functionalities in Sage (if yes, open issues on github with cross links)
 - see if anybody changed sage/libs/ppl.pyx since the fork (if yes, list the commit and port them into pplpy)
 - prepare a package for pplpy as documented in the developer guide

Answer 29 · 2017-11-24T14:59:46.000Z

Changed dependencies from #22928, #23309 to #22928

Answer 30 · 2017-11-24T18:47:36.000Z

comment:23

pplpy 0.7 is out

Answer 31 · 2017-12-19T15:40:22.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

`760bbdf`	`Modify associahedron doctest`
`6d3345e`	`Updating checksum for pplpy pkg`
`85cb9fc`	`remove mpz_to_sage_integer function`
`70177c8`	`assert simplification ppl_lattice_polytope.py`
`b0858a2`	`remove skip=('_test_pickling') option for pplpy polyhedron`
`94c7817`	`remove sage/libs/ppl from doctree`
`67c8c2e`	`update checksum, snapshot version update in setup.py`
`50d62ff`	`Add path of gmpy2 in include_dirs`
`375fda6`	`Trac #23024 Fix checksum (pplpy), spkg-install and spkg-check`
`dc37f38`	`Trac #23024 Add new mpz gmpy2 to sage Integer conversion`

Answer 32 · 2017-12-19T15:40:22.000Z

Changed commit from 7a5812a to dc37f38

Answer 33 · 2017-12-19T15:42:44.000Z

comment:26

Rebase on 22928 (with 22928 based on 8.2.beta0)

Answer 34 · 2017-12-19T21:22:56.000Z

comment:27

You need to provide a link to the pplpy tarball.

Answer 35 · 2017-12-19T21:27:51.000Z

comment:28

And proper deprecation has to be done for sage.libs.ppl so that a user doing

sage: from sage.libs.ppl import whatever

should not get an ImportError but a warning. See http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/misc/sage/misc/superseded.htm

Answer 36 · 2017-12-19T21:27:51.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -1,8 +1,6 @@
-The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) is now superseded by the stand alone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (!Python/!Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy.
+The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) are now superseded by the standalone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy. It
 
-Some steps :
-- pplpy and gmpy2 must be standard packages.
-- list any ticket proposing to extend ppl functionalities in Sage (if yes, open issues on github with cross links)
-- see if anybody changed sage/libs/ppl.pyx since the fork (if yes, list the commit and port them into pplpy)
-- prepare a package for pplpy as documented in the developer guide
+- creates a new standard package pplpy
+- upgrade gmpy2 from optional to standard
 - replace the Sage code calling sage/libs/ppl.pyx to call pplpy
+- make appropriate deprecation for `sage.libs.ppl`

Answer 37 · 2017-12-20T08:07:19.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -4,3 +4,5 @@
 - upgrade gmpy2 from optional to standard
 - replace the Sage code calling sage/libs/ppl.pyx to call pplpy
 - make appropriate deprecation for `sage.libs.ppl`
+
+pplpy' Tarball : [pplpy-0.7.tar.gz](https://pypi.python.org/packages/ca/d3/1629e95997068c129e3a5235fd32a39e4fc39faca892cf9a2da11f842fb9/pplpy-0.7.tar.gz#md5=89dd6a1e75e06e287adae2ea4dbc143b)

Answer 38 · 2017-12-20T10:32:38.000Z

comment:30

And by proper deprecation do you mean keeping sage.libs.ppl fully functioning with his doctests ? Or do we prefer to shutdown sage.libs.ppl functionalities (Functions don't do their old work and just return a warning) ?

Answer 39 · 2017-12-20T10:41:03.000Z

comment:31

Replying to @vinklein:

And by proper deprecation do you mean keeping sage.libs.ppl fully functioning with his doctests ? Or do we prefer to shutdown sage.libs.ppl functionalities (Functions don't do their old work and just return a warning) ?

The aim is not to keep sage.libs.ppl but to just to have some indirection in the import so that you do not break user's code. As sage.libs.ppl will not here anymore I do not expect the full doctesuite to pass as it used to be. But the following kind of things should work (and be doctested)

sage: from sage.libs.ppl import Variable, Constraint_System, C_Polyhedron
UserWarning: proper deprecation message
sage: x = Variable(0)
sage: y = Variable(1)
sage: cs = Constraint_System()
sage: cs.insert(x >= 0)
sage: cs.insert(x <= 3)
sage: cs.insert(y >= 0)
sage: cs.insert(y <= 3)
sage: poly_from_constraints = C_Polyhedron(cs)

And the various objects constructed above are of course from pplpy.

You can have a look at other places in the sage code and look for "deprecation" and "lazy_import".

Answer 40 · 2017-12-20T11:10:53.000Z

comment:32

Well, i spoke with Sebastien L. and if the goal is to let one year for developers to adapt their old code, doing an indirection is not enough. Mainly because pplpy use gmpy2 (some functions return and calls are differents).

Therefore it seems like we should keep sage.libs.ppl old code with added warnings.

Answer 41 · 2017-12-21T01:47:51.000Z

comment:34

Just a small request can you put upstream's address in SPKG.txt? Of course you are available on pypi but it is not the same as being able to find where to fill bugs and what the current issues are straight away.

Answer 42 · 2017-12-21T07:57:32.000Z

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

`7d19154`	`Trac #23024 SPKG.txt add upstream contact and licence.`

Answer 43 · 2017-12-21T07:57:32.000Z

Changed commit from dc37f38 to 7d19154

Answer 44 · 2017-12-21T08:01:17.000Z

comment:36

Done, thanks for noticing that.

Answer 45 · 2017-12-21T09:41:49.000Z

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

`01403bd`	`Trac #23024 Deprecate sage.libs.ppl`

Answer 46 · 2017-12-21T09:41:49.000Z

Changed commit from 7d19154 to 01403bd

Answer 47 · 2017-12-21T09:45:31.000Z

comment:38

Deprecation of sage.libs.ppl added. As the whole module is deprecated i choose to send deprecation warning at import time.

Answer 48 · 2017-12-21T10:05:52.000Z

comment:39

Replying to @vinklein:

Deprecation of sage.libs.ppl added. As the whole module is deprecated i choose to send deprecation warning at import time.

Good solution.

Now, we just need to wait for #22928...

Answer 49 · 2017-12-21T15:56:48.000Z

comment:40

Did you run the testsuite!?

sage -t src/sage/geometry/lattice_polytope.py
**********************************************************************
File "src/sage/geometry/lattice_polytope.py", line 1608, in sage.geometry.lattice_polytope.LatticePolytopeClass.boundary_point_indices
Failed example:
    face.points()
Exception raised:
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "/home/vdelecro/sage_patchbot/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage/doctest/forker.py", line 517, in _run
        self.compile_and_execute(example, compiler, test.globs)
      File "/home/vdelecro/sage_patchbot/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage/doctest/forker.py", line 920, in compile_and_execute
        exec(compiled, globs)
      File "<doctest sage.geometry.lattice_polytope.LatticePolytopeClass.boundary_point_indices[4]>", line 1, in <module>
        face.points()
      File "/home/vdelecro/sage_patchbot/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage/geometry/lattice_polytope.py", line 3680, in points
        l = gcd(v)
    NameError: global name 'gcd' is not defined

Answer 50 · 2017-12-21T16:37:30.000Z

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

`e395e0e`	`Trac #23024 Use gmpy2 as a standard package`
`d244109`	`Trac #23024 Restore import gcd`

Answer 51 · 2017-12-21T16:37:30.000Z

Changed commit from 01403bd to d244109

Answer 52 · 2017-12-21T16:42:35.000Z

comment:42

Yes i have see this one.
The last remaining problem is a SEGFAULT when running ppl_lattice_polytope.py doctests.

Answer 53 · 2017-12-21T16:46:10.000Z

comment:43

Could you post the log here?

Answer 54 · 2017-12-21T16:53:33.000Z

comment:44

Replying to @videlec:

Could you post the log here?

segfault_ppl_lattice_polytope.log

Short story is

sage: LatticePolytope_PPL((0,0),(1/2,1))

cause a Segfault.

Answer 55 · 2017-12-21T17:19:01.000Z

comment:45

Isn't it aleaxit/gmpy#174?

Answer 56 · 2017-12-21T17:27:58.000Z

comment:46

At least with the patch applied I got

sage: from sage.geometry.polyhedron.ppl_lattice_polytope import LatticePolytope_PPL
sage: LatticePolytope_PPL((0,0),(1/2,1))
Traceback (most recent call last):
...
TypeError: rational is not an integer

Answer 57 · 2017-12-21T17:33:46.000Z

comment:47

See #24417

Answer 58 · 2017-12-21T18:27:21.000Z

comment:48

Replying to @videlec:

Isn't it aleaxit/gmpy#174?

Yes it is ! Nicely done.

Answer 59 · 2018-01-31T16:40:52.000Z

Changed commit from d244109 to 3cec632

Answer 60 · 2018-01-31T16:40:52.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. Last 10 new commits:

`7596cff`	`remove sage/libs/ppl from doctree`
`0cd326c`	`update checksum, snapshot version update in setup.py`
`91b5d52`	`Add path of gmpy2 in include_dirs`
`0b965a7`	`Trac #23024 Fix checksum (pplpy), spkg-install and spkg-check`
`dd886fb`	`Trac #23024 Add new mpz gmpy2 to sage Integer conversion`
`b7a5a21`	`Trac #23024 SPKG.txt add upstream contact and licence.`
`96146ca`	`Trac #23024 Deprecate sage.libs.ppl`
`e85ae5f`	`Trac #23024 Use gmpy2 as a standard package`
`da9aa35`	`Trac #23024 Restore import gcd`
`3cec632`	`Trac #23024 : merge #22928 ppl.pyx add deprecation warning ...`

Answer 61 · 2018-01-31T16:45:33.000Z

Changed commit from 3cec632 to d206c14

Answer 62 · 2018-01-31T16:45:33.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

`d206c14`	`Trac #23024: ppl.pyx add deprecation warning to long doctest`

Answer 63 · 2018-01-31T16:56:29.000Z

comment:51

You are adding sage.libs.gmpy2 in 7596cff and removing it in 91b5d52...

Answer 64 · 2018-01-31T17:01:22.000Z

comment:52

Yes adding it was one of our old solutions. Before having a better include in pplpy's setup.py if i remember correctly. All of this historical things can be squashed later.

Answer 65 · 2018-01-31T17:02:45.000Z

comment:53

It's the same for ppl.pyx we don't need to show that we deleted it and restore and deprecate later.

Answer 66 · 2018-02-01T08:21:20.000Z

comment:54

There are a lot of trailing whitespaces that should be removed.

Answer 67 · 2018-02-01T09:45:33.000Z

Changed commit from d206c14 to f3e4bcd

Answer 68 · 2018-02-01T09:45:33.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

`886424b`	`Trac 23024: Add pplpy as a standard package`
`a6e1cc7`	`Trac 23024: Replace sage.libs.ppl with pplpy package`
`f3e4bcd`	`Trac #23024: Use gmpy2 as a standard package`

Answer 69 · 2018-02-01T09:49:06.000Z

comment:56

History rewrited. Trailing whitespaces removed in real_mpfr.pyx, complex_mpc.pyx and complex_number.pyx files.

Answer 70 · 2018-02-02T13:49:36.000Z

comment:57

I don't understand why you are modifying pplpy/SPKG.txt, pplpy/checksums.ini, pplpy/spkg-check, etc in both 886424b and a6e1cc7.

Answer 71 · 2018-02-03T09:47:39.000Z

comment:58

Build fine and all tests pass on my computer!

Answer 72 · 2018-02-05T08:16:53.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) are now superseded by the standalone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `sage/src/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy. It
+The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) are now superseded by the standalone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `src/sage/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy. It
 
 - creates a new standard package pplpy
 - upgrade gmpy2 from optional to standard

Answer 73 · 2018-02-05T08:50:28.000Z

comment:60

Use sdh_pip_install instead of $PIP_INSTALL

Answer 74 · 2018-02-05T08:52:26.000Z

comment:61

Is the license of pplpy really GPL version 3? Or do you mean GPL version 3 or later? The difference is important.

Answer 75 · 2018-02-05T08:54:43.000Z

comment:62

This looks like a strange way to check if something is one:

Integer(p.divisor()).is_one()

What's wrong with

p.divisor() == 1

Answer 76 · 2018-02-05T08:57:29.000Z

comment:63

Replying to @jdemeyer:

Is the license of pplpy really GPL version 3? Or do you mean GPL version 3 or later? The difference is important.

Yes the current one is GPL version 3 (see LICENSE.txt). Is it better to say GPL version 3 or later anyway ?

Answer 77 · 2018-02-05T09:01:24.000Z

comment:64

In backend_ppl.py you do from gmpy2 import mpz but you're not using it.

Answer 78 · 2018-02-05T09:04:32.000Z

comment:65

Replying to @vinklein:

Is it better to say GPL version 3 or later anyway ?

See https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/issues/28

Answer 79 · 2018-02-05T10:02:43.000Z

comment:66

Replying to @jdemeyer:

What's wrong with
p.divisor() == 1

p.divisor() return a gmpy2.mpz.

Answer 80 · 2018-02-05T10:16:34.000Z

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

`ef97c32`	Trac #23024: spkg-install `sdh_pip_install` instead ...

Answer 81 · 2018-02-05T10:16:34.000Z

Changed commit from f3e4bcd to ef97c32

Answer 82 · 2018-02-05T23:00:18.000Z

comment:68

Replying to @vinklein:

Replying to @jdemeyer:
What's wrong with
p.divisor() == 1
p.divisor() return a gmpy2.mpz.

What is wrong with

>>> gmpy2.mpz(1) == 1
True

Answer 83 · 2018-02-06T08:10:11.000Z

comment:69

Replying to @videlec:

...
What is wrong with
>>> gmpy2.mpz(1) == 1
True

In this case you compare a python int with a gmpy2.mpz.

But with sage's Integer :

sage: gmpy2.mpz(1) == 1
False

Edit: Hum ok my bad.

Answer 84 · 2018-02-06T08:40:21.000Z

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

`2f98d70`	`Trac #23024: Code cleaning`

Answer 85 · 2018-02-06T08:40:21.000Z

Changed commit from ef97c32 to 2f98d70

Answer 86 · 2018-02-06T16:27:35.000Z

comment:71

self-testing fails:

$ SAGE_CHECK=yes ./sage -f pplpy
...
[pplpy-0.7] Successfully installed pplpy-0.7
[pplpy-0.7] Cleaning up...
[pplpy-0.7] 
[pplpy-0.7] real	0m38.345s
[pplpy-0.7] user	0m36.490s
[pplpy-0.7] sys	0m1.835s
[pplpy-0.7] Copying package files from temporary location /home/dima/Sage/sage-dev/local/var/tmp/sage/build/pplpy-0.7/inst to /home/dima/Sage/sage-dev/local
[pplpy-0.7] Running the test suite for pplpy-0.7...
[pplpy-0.7] running test
[pplpy-0.7] error: cannot copy tree './tests': not a directory
[pplpy-0.7]

Answer 87 · 2018-02-06T17:09:09.000Z

comment:72

Indeed. https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/issues/30

Answer 88 · 2019-01-18T09:25:15.000Z

Changed dependencies from #22928 to none

Answer 89 · 2019-01-18T13:11:27.000Z

comment:75

This would still be a good thing to do IMO, in general.

Answer 90 · 2019-01-18T21:20:18.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -5,4 +5,4 @@
 - replace the Sage code calling sage/libs/ppl.pyx to call pplpy
 - make appropriate deprecation for `sage.libs.ppl`
 
-pplpy' Tarball : [pplpy-0.7.tar.gz](https://pypi.python.org/packages/ca/d3/1629e95997068c129e3a5235fd32a39e4fc39faca892cf9a2da11f842fb9/pplpy-0.7.tar.gz#md5=89dd6a1e75e06e287adae2ea4dbc143b)
+pplpy' Tarball : [pplpy-0.8.tar.gz](https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/9b/bb/4973d00ec0b02bb5c4a744584a41d29b68bb9fec529407d81808e46adcca/pplpy-0.8.tar.gz)

Answer 91 · 2019-01-18T21:24:13.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) are now superseded by the standalone [pplpy](https://github.com/videlec/pplpy/) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `src/sage/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy. It
+The Sage wrappers around [ppl](http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/) are now superseded by the standalone [pplpy](https://gitlab.com/videlec/pplpy) (Python/Cython compatible). This ticket proposes to replace `src/sage/libs/ppl.pyx` extension with pplpy. It
 
 - creates a new standard package pplpy
 - upgrade gmpy2 from optional to standard

Answer 92 · 2019-01-22T17:08:49.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

`f5b7110`	`Trac 23024: Add pplpy as a standard package`
`82a5d24`	`Trac 23024: Replace sage.libs.ppl with pplpy package`
`59617e1`	`Trac #23024: Use gmpy2 as a standard package`
`8f51887`	Trac #23024: spkg-install `sdh_pip_install` instead ...
`d7a67d4`	`Trac #23024: Code cleaning`
`9ea9382`	`Trac #23024: Remove HAVE_GMPY2 from coerce.pyx`
`55ad161`	`Trac #23024: fix ppl_lattice_polytope doctests`

Answer 93 · 2019-01-22T17:08:49.000Z

Changed commit from 2f98d70 to 55ad161

Answer 94 · 2019-01-22T17:13:21.000Z

comment:79

Rebased on sage8.6

Answer 95 · 2019-01-23T18:22:08.000Z

Description changed:

--- 
+++ 
@@ -5,4 +5,4 @@
 - replace the Sage code calling sage/libs/ppl.pyx to call pplpy
 - make appropriate deprecation for `sage.libs.ppl`
 
-pplpy' Tarball : [pplpy-0.8.tar.gz](https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/9b/bb/4973d00ec0b02bb5c4a744584a41d29b68bb9fec529407d81808e46adcca/pplpy-0.8.tar.gz)
+pplpy' Tarball : [pplpy-0.8.1.tar.gz](https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/b2/90/890f89536a0fdd66d78a07d963152502b4b1af7c94366d8bb16e7ff8e309/pplpy-0.8.1.tar.gz)

Answer 96 · 2019-01-23T18:36:40.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

`90d999b`	`Trac #23024: fix ppl_lattice_polytope doctests`
`e90bc77`	`Trac #23024: upgrade pplpy version to 0.8.1`

Answer 97 · 2019-01-23T18:36:40.000Z

Changed commit from 55ad161 to e90bc77

Answer 98 · 2019-01-23T18:37:21.000Z

comment:82

upgrade pplpy to 0.8.1

Answer 99 · 2019-01-24T07:04:45.000Z

comment:83

Apparently a merge failure with sage 8.7.beta0

Answer 100 · 2019-01-24T10:34:56.000Z

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. This was a forced push. New commits:

`c37dcb0`	`Trac 23024: Add pplpy as a standard package`
`3f5eed8`	`Trac 23024: Replace sage.libs.ppl with pplpy package`
`26d3d54`	`Trac #23024: Use gmpy2 as a standard package`
`1a5d7e5`	Trac #23024: spkg-install `sdh_pip_install` instead ...
`62452d5`	`Trac #23024: Code cleaning`
`58a0e8a`	`Trac #23024: Remove HAVE_GMPY2 from coerce.pyx`
`dabd865`	`Trac #23024: fix ppl_lattice_polytope doctests`
`9a06541`	`Trac #23024: upgrade pplpy version to 0.8.1`