I wrote a patch according to your suggestion in
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10473
Thank you.
--
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this
On Dec 11, 1:36 pm, Jason Grout wrote:
>
> I think it may have just been a copy-paste error from the lmul function.
There is an error in lmul, but there is also an inconsistency between
the manual and the docstring for rmul (that is, if I'm reading them
correctly):
According to the manual, r*s
On 12/11/10 11:27 AM, Niles wrote:
On Dec 10, 10:36 pm, Kwankyu wrote:
Hi,
Below is a passage in the Reference manual on the coercion model:
... r * s gets
handled as s._rmul_(r)
sage: s=1/2*x;parent(s)
sage: s._rmul_?
...
Definition: s._rmul_(self, right)
Docstring:
File: sage/ri
On Dec 10, 10:36 pm, Kwankyu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Below is a passage in the Reference manual on the coercion model:
>
> ... r * s gets
> handled as s._rmul_(r)
>
> sage: s=1/2*x;parent(s)
> sage: s._rmul_?
> ...
> Definition: s._rmul_(self, right)
> Docstring:
> File: sage/rings/polynomial/p
Hi,
On 11 Dez., 04:36, Kwankyu wrote:
> Below is a passage in the Reference manual on the coercion model:
>
> If R is the base of S (as in the first example), simply implement
> _rmul_ and/or _lmul_ on the Elements of S. In this case r * s gets
> handled as s._rmul_(r) and s * r as s._lmul_(r).
>
