sage

> how you think you can match the "cohesiveness" of Mathematica The basic strategy is to provide a new Python library ("the sage library" [1]), which is a layer between the user and the other dependencies. E.g., instead of just saying "use Maxima for symbolic limits", we have our own notion of symbolic functions (implemented using Ginac), and automatically convert them to and from Maxima when doing symbolic limits. The user never has to know anything about Maxima. When we first implemented this, it just used interprocess communication under the hood, but (thanks to Nils Bruin and others) we now use a direct C library interface builton top of ECL (embedded common lisp). This "new Python library", which isn't so new, since I started it in 2004, is now nearly a million lines of code. [1] https://github.com/sagemath/sage/tree/master/src/

At the very beginning (back in 2005) it was mostly a distribution, but during the last 12 years an enormous amount of new code (over 500K SLOC) has been written, building on top of that distribution. You can get a sense of the scale and velocity of development here: https://github.com/sagemath/sage/graphs/contributors

(I'm the guy who started Sage.) Sage has the Jacobi symbol as of 7 years ago (see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/11138 and https://github.com/sagemath/sage/blob/07d6c37d18811e2b377a96...). Sage is pretty good at primality testing, because PARI is. I'm really glad that the author of this library is enjoying writing Algebraic number theory that is readable and in Python3. Go for it, and have fun!