Hi William and all, Note another severe oddity:
sage: gcd(int(3),3/1) 3 sage: gcd(3,3/1) 1 On 12 Feb., 03:20, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: > I vote for changing the defn of sage rational gcd to match the > "Pari/Mma/(Sage lcm+Maxima gcd) " convention. Since +1 isn't having > the desired effect, I vote with my BDFL powers instead. > > Somebody post a patch. I am about to post a patch -- see #10771. There is one problem, though. There is precisely one fraction field that has its own gcd/lcm implemented: The rational field. There is a rationale provided in the documentation why this particular choice of a gcd was made. Question: Shall I remove the custom gcd/lcm for QQ and replace it by something that restricts to the usual gcd/lcm on ZZ? Or is that likely to break stuff? I could imagine that number theory people have a certain preference for a particular choice of a gcd in QQ. So, I am cross-posting to sage-nt. Cheers, Simon -- 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
