William Stein wrote: > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:21 AM, Bjake Hammersholt Roune > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> [...] people are confused that when >>> they create a matrix with matrix(3, range(9)), for example, that the >>> echelon_form is not the rref output that they get from most any other >>> program they have ever used [...] >>> What do people think about making the default ring for matrices QQ? >>> >> I have no objections to making QQ the defailt ring for matrices. > > I do. That's definitely *not* the proposal. The proposal is to make the > base ring the fraction field of the canonical ring in which the list of > entries live, if that fraction field is defined. QQ was just an example.
The other part of the proposal is making it so that a matrix without a ring specified and without entries specified would default to being over QQ, i.e., we would have: sage: matrix(3,3).parent() Rational Field Currently this returns a matrix over ZZ. In that sense, the default ring for matrices would be QQ instead of ZZ after the change. Thanks, Jason --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
