Re: Split up Section: programming/specific

[Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux.fr>]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:49:35AM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> For the Python bindings to PARI/GP, I need to decide which GP functions to
> interface and which not. I do this based on the information in pari.desc: I
> only consider "Class: basic" and I skip "Section: programming/control"
> because those don't make sense outside of GP. I obviously skip functions
> without a C-Name.
> 
> However, inside "Section: programming/specific" there are many functions
> that don't make sense ("quit", everything regarding scoping such as
> "localbitprec" and "exportall") but also functions which are useful
> ("setrand" for example).
> 
> It would be useful to split this section into "things specific to GP" and
> "general-purpose non-mathematical functions". What do you think?

How would you call them and what functions would you include in them ?
It seems to me that the decision of adding Python bindings for a function or
not belong to the bindings maintainers and not to us, and so we will not
know whether we should put new functions in some section or another.

There is the separate concern that the set of GP function is a very
small subset of the PARI interface and that restricting the Python
bindings to them is quite limiting.

Cheers,
Bill.