On May 1, 7:38 am, kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > sage: P>x^2+x
> > > Expected:
> > > True
> > > Got:
> > > False
>
> Yes, I just added that test to show that Primes() has comparison. I
> was a little surprised to see the result, but it passed testing, so...
>
> If someone posts a ticket with a suggested fix that makes Primes()
> greater than everything, I can try to implement it - I but for now I
> just wanted to make sure it was clear Primes() did compare to weird
> things and not throw an error.
Well, what I wrote was nonsense. __cmp__ always returns -1 unless both
are Primes(), i.e what is greater depends on what is left and right
respectively. I don't care too much about that now, but if someone has
a better suggestion I am interested in hearing it.
> Note in the docstring for comparing (current) symbolics that
> Some comparisons are fairly arbitrary but
> consistent:: sage: cmp(SR(3), x) #random due to
> architecture dependence -1 sage: cmp(x, SR(3))
> #random due to architecture dependence 1 """
> so perhaps it's not a Maxima thing but a symbolic comparison thing.
Never write a doctest to be #random if you can trivially work around
it. In both cases the point is that cmp() should not return "0" since
x and SR(3) aren't equal. Should that ever be broken the doctest would
not catch it, so something like
sage: cmp(SR(3), x) in [-1,1]
True
is much better in that case.
> - kcrisman
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
