On 18-Jan-08, at 8:59 AM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
> > I just came across: > > http://docs.python.org/ref/customization.html > > where it reads: > > """ > Called by the repr() built-in function and by string conversions > (reverse > quotes) to compute the ``official'' string representation of an > object. If at > all possible, this should look like a valid Python expression that > could be > used to recreate an object with the same value (given an appropriate > environment). ______If this is not possible, a string of the form > "<...some > useful description...>" should be returned____. > """ > > Thoughts about: > > sage: sage: P.<x,y,z> = PolynomialRing(QQ) > sage: P > <Multivariate Polynomial Ring in x, y, z over Rational Field> I have thought about this (and come to no conclusion) but be aware that it would be: <Multivariate Polynomial Ring in x, y, z over <Rational Field>> and it could be possibly worse, with much deeper nesting. Such a convention is present in Lisp (the #<> form) and Smalltalk, so over system designers also thought it was important. But there's a lot of documentation written without it, and it looks rather unnatural to a Maple/Magma/Mathematica user. Nick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
