Jason Grout writes:
> On 11/5/12 7:40 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> I didn't realize foo[1,2] would pass the tuple (1,2) to __getitem__
>> until the very end, so it would make sense to go back and replace the
>> function calls with indexing.
>>
>> I think the only thing we'd lose is a() -> 'a', a
On 11/11/2012 05:25 AM, Burcin Erocal wrote:
>
> Thanks for pointing this out Jean-Pierre. Here is the ticket:
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11576
>
> I don't remember if the patch attached to the ticket is the most recent
> one. This might be better:
>
> http://sage.math.washin
Hi,
On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:16:55 -0800 (PST)
Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
> IIRC there was some work about this done (but not merged?).
> No time to search myself now, but searching trac and the pynac-devel
> list should give some hints, or contacting Burcin and or Florent
> Hivert.
Thanks for poin
IIRC there was some work about this done (but not merged?).
No time to search myself now, but searching trac and the pynac-devel list
should give some hints, or contacting Burcin and or Florent Hivert.
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:25:24 AM UTC-6, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> On 11/06/2012 10:5
On 11/06/2012 10:51 PM, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> On Nov 6, 7:14 am, Jason Grout wrote:
>> What about a[None] returning a? That's a little awkward, I guess.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>
> I would never think that a[None] would return a, whatever a is! I'd
> expect something "empty"...
I've jus
On Nov 6, 7:14 am, Jason Grout wrote:
> What about a[None] returning a? That's a little awkward, I guess.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
I would never think that a[None] would return a, whatever a is! I'd
expect something "empty"...
Andrey
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
On 11/5/12 7:40 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 11/05/2012 05:05 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
Very nice!
In the spirit of Python [1], "There should be one-- and preferably only
one --obvious way to do it.", may I suggest that you pick one indexing
convention (e.g., round or square brackets) and use t
On 11/05/2012 05:05 PM, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> Very nice!
>
> In the spirit of Python [1], "There should be one-- and preferably only
> one --obvious way to do it.", may I suggest that you pick one indexing
> convention (e.g., round or square brackets) and use that? I'd suggest
> using square
On 11/5/12 3:52 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 11/05/12 12:40, Jason Grout wrote:
On 11/4/12 11:14 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
I'm playing around with different ways to create collections of symbolic
variables. I though it would be nice to be able to chain subscripts,
e.g.,
sage: x[1][2]
On 11/05/12 12:40, Jason Grout wrote:
> On 11/4/12 11:14 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> I'm playing around with different ways to create collections of symbolic
>> variables. I though it would be nice to be able to chain subscripts,
>> e.g.,
>>
>>sage: x[1][2]
>>x12
>>sage: latex(x[1][2
On 11/4/12 11:14 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
I'm playing around with different ways to create collections of symbolic
variables. I though it would be nice to be able to chain subscripts, e.g.,
sage: x[1][2]
x12
sage: latex(x[1][2])
x_{1}_{2}
Why not do:
x[1,2]
to save typing and
11 matches
Mail list logo
