On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:05 PM, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: > This reminds me of / being a constructor for elements of QQ, no matter > what, i.e., a/b for a and b both integers (with b!=0) is a rational, > no matter what: > > sage: type(2/3) > <type 'sage.rings.rational.Rational'> > sage: type(2/1) > <type 'sage.rings.rational.Rational'> > > This was an important design decision that David Kohel pushed hard for > early on. Having sqrt(2) > 1 *not* simplify by default is consistent > with this design decision in that "foo > bar" for either foo or bar > symbolic, is a constructor for a symbolic equation.
I strongly agree with this design decision. However, the "no simplification" policy doesn't follow from this. Rather, I think, the design leads to sage: sqrt(2) > 1 True sage: parent(sqrt(2) > 1) Symbolic Ring i.e. a symbolic "True" or "False" this would be consistent with, e.g. sage: (SR(x) + 1) - SR(x) 1 which is 1 in SR, not in ZZ; or even sage: 2/1 2 which is 2 in QQ, not in ZZ. Gonzalo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
