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

Rebase documentation improvements in #1173 to sage-5.0 #13001

Closed
benjaminfjones opened this issue May 25, 2012 · 9 comments
Closed

Rebase documentation improvements in #1173 to sage-5.0 #13001

benjaminfjones opened this issue May 25, 2012 · 9 comments

Comments

@benjaminfjones
Copy link
Contributor

Since #11948 solved the main issue involved in #1173 (numerical eval of erf at complex arguments), it would be good to save some of DSMs work on improving the documentation and adding more doctests for erf.


Apply to $SAGE_ROOT/devel/sage:

CC: @sagetrac-dsm

Component: documentation

Keywords: erf doctest sd40.5

Author: Benjamin Jones

Reviewer: Dan Drake

Merged: sage-5.1.beta2

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/13001

@benjaminfjones
Copy link
Contributor Author

Changed keywords from erf doctest to erf doctest sd40.5

@benjaminfjones
Copy link
Contributor Author

rebase documentation improvements from #1173 to sage-5.0

@benjaminfjones
Copy link
Contributor Author

Author: Benjamin Jones

@benjaminfjones
Copy link
Contributor Author

comment:2

Attachment: trac_13001.patch.gz

@benjaminfjones
Copy link
Contributor Author

comment:4

Attachment: trac_13001_reviewer.patch.gz

Looks great, thanks!

@benjaminfjones

This comment has been minimized.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

jdemeyer commented Jun 2, 2012

Merged: sage-5.1.beta2

@jdemeyer jdemeyer closed this as completed Jun 2, 2012
@jdemeyer jdemeyer changed the title rebase documentation improvements in #1173 to sage-5.0 Rebase documentation improvements in #1173 to sage-5.0 Jun 2, 2012
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

3 participants
@benjaminfjones @jdemeyer and others