Hi Robert, On 26 Jan., 19:13, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu> wrote: > Should [a, b; c, d] be a valid syntax for matrix construction in Sage? > > [ ] Yes, I love this syntax! It would be make life better for me and > my students. [X ] I wouldn't oppose, but may require some convincing. > [ ] No, that's a horrible idea. > > Why?
When I create matrices, then I usually do so in a program. Hence, syntactical sugar such as the suggested notion simply does not matter for me. First, I create a matrix space, and then construct matrices by passing lists (or lists of lists) of elements to the matrix space. I find this rather practical. Personally, I find the syntax "[1,2;3,4]" horrible. But I wouldn't be so mean to prevent other people from using it. > Should the default basering be more linear-algebra friendly? E.g. R -> > Frac(R), RR -> RDF. > > [ ] Yes, that would take away a lot of pain/be what I'd have to > specify manually anyway. > [ ] Could be handy, but the drawbacks are significant. > [ ] No, matrices over QQ are for sissies, real mathematicians work > over ZZ unless otherwise specified. None of the above. Real mathematicians and real programmers are providing the base ring explicitly :-) 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
