Hello,
> After sending this email I reviewed some of the previous messages
> about the use of repr in Sage. One way of summarizing this is that
> Sage does not actually follow the usual Python convention here (in
> spite of my examples :-).
Yes, Sage has consciously rejected that convention.
> But I just wanted to add here that the same
> issue applies if one substitutes 'str' for 'repr':
>
> sage: p=axiom('1/2')
> sage: str(p)
> ' 1\r\n -\r\n 2'
Another data point:
sage: str(maxima(1/2)).strip()
'1\r\n -\r\n
2'
I think the quality of a particular interface in Sage is inversely
proportional to the amount of strings you need to pass around. For
example, http://wiki.sagemath.org/MuPADInterface hardly uses any
strings at all. Using MuPAD(-Combinat) from that interface feels
pretty natural. Also notice
sage: mupad(x^2)
2
x
I still find the following behavior much worse than the current
behavior (which is why I made the change):
sage: axiom(2.123)
float(156649750673941527080,-66,2)
That's not useful to anyone or any other system.
--Mike
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
