[sage-devel] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Sage 3.1.2.alpha4 released

2008-09-06 Thread Bill Page
Here is a better definition: def float(x,e,b): return RealField(axiom('precision()$Float'))(x)*b^e On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 11:10 PM, Bill Page wrote: > On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Bill Page wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Mike Hansen wrote: >>> >>> I still find the following b

[sage-devel] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Sage 3.1.2.alpha4 released

2008-09-06 Thread Bill Page
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Bill Page wrote: > On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Mike Hansen wrote: >> >> 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 no

[sage-devel] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Sage 3.1.2.alpha4 released

2008-09-06 Thread Bill Page
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Mike Hansen wrote: > > Another data point: > sage: str(maxima(1/2)).strip() > '1\r\n -\r\n > 2' > Oh, groan! It's bad enough that Sage rejects the Python convention concerning repr but this is terrible. :-( >

[sage-devel] Re: [fricas-devel] Re: [sage-devel] Sage 3.1.2.alpha4 released

2008-09-06 Thread Mike Hansen
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. >