On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:46:15PM +0100, Florent hivert wrote:
> > Quick question: many types have methods one_element() and
> > zero_element() which are used a lot. For example, ZZ.one() and
> > ZZ.zero() are aliases for ZZ.one_element() and ZZ.zero_element(). Is
> > your intention to depreca
Hi Robert,
>> One of the main problem here is that PEP 335 "Overloadable Boolean
>> Operators"
>> is not yet accepted. So right now there is no way to implement a three
>> state
>> logic, is there one ? If not, Is there a way we can push on python dev to
>> have
>> this PEP accepted ?
>
On Mar 1, 2010, at 1:22 PM, Florent Hivert wrote:
Not my idea. This was the way it worked in MuPAD. There was a
three state
boolean value, which was quite useful. Looking into python docs to
see if
we
can have "and" and "or" work with a 3-state booleans, I found:
" A rich comparison method
>> Not my idea. This was the way it worked in MuPAD. There was a three state
>> boolean value, which was quite useful. Looking into python docs to see if
>> we
>> can have "and" and "or" work with a 3-state booleans, I found:
>>
>> " A rich comparison method may return the singleton NotImplemented
On Feb 27, 2010, at 2:22 PM, Florent Hivert wrote:
Hi Robert,
You get the point. As far as I understand a RIF only return True
if the
interval are reduced to a single point. Is it right ? It would be
better
to
return a special value like Unknown than False. But that's another
question
Hi Robert,
>> You get the point. As far as I understand a RIF only return True if the
>> interval are reduced to a single point. Is it right ? It would be better
>> to
>> return a special value like Unknown than False. But that's another
>> question...
>>
>> [...]
>
> I certainly agree tha
> I certainly agree that 1-2 should be the general rule, I was just pointing
> out an exception. I like the idea of returning an Unknown object on RIF
> comparisons as well.
This is now #8402 (work in progress).
Florent
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To
On Feb 27, 2010, at 3:14 AM, Florent Hivert wrote:
Hi Robert,
In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements
in
sage,
I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all
reasonable
but I may be asking to much. Please comment about the following:
1 - A
I agree, subject to changing "SageObject" in 1 to "Element and
CategoryObject".
David
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 6:14 AM, Florent Hivert <
florent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr> wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> >> In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements in
> >> sage,
> >> I'm about to
Hi Robert,
>> In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements in
>> sage,
>> I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all
>> reasonable
>> but I may be asking to much. Please comment about the following:
>>
>> 1 - Any SageObject must have an equalit
On Feb 26, 2010, at 12:59 PM, Florent Hivert wrote:
Hi there,
In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements
in sage,
I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all
reasonable
but I may be asking to much. Please comment about the following:
1
> Quick question: many types have methods one_element() and
> zero_element() which are used a lot. For example, ZZ.one() and
> ZZ.zero() are aliases for ZZ.one_element() and ZZ.zero_element(). Is
> your intention to deprecate these longer names?
I had the impression that this has been already
Hi David,
> > In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements in sage,
> > I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all
> > reasonable
> > but I may be asking to much. Please comment about the following:
> >
> > 1 - Any SageObject must have an equali
On 26-Feb-10, at 12:59 PM, Florent Hivert wrote:
Hi there,
In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements
in sage,
I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all
reasonable
but I may be asking to much.
I think your suggestions are reasonable
Quick question: many types have methods one_element() and
zero_element() which are used a lot. For example, ZZ.one() and
ZZ.zero() are aliases for ZZ.one_element() and ZZ.zero_element(). Is
your intention to deprecate these longer names?
John
On 26 February 2010 21:16, David Roe wrote:
>
>
>
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Florent Hivert <
florent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements in sage,
> I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all
> reasonable
> but I may be asking to much.
Hi
Sorry for replying to myself.
> In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements in sage,
> I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all reasonable
> but I may be asking to much. Please comment about the following:
>
> 1 - Any SageObject must hav
Hi there,
In order to sanitize the behavior of objects, parents and elements in sage,
I'm about to add some tests to the framework. I think they are all reasonable
but I may be asking to much. Please comment about the following:
1 - Any SageObject must have an equality methods such that
18 matches
Mail list logo
