iOn 3/8/07, Jonathan Bober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all. The following (minor) issue has been bothering me a little bit
> for a while.
>
> Currently if I write lcm([1,2,3]), I get six, but lcm( (1,2,3) ) gives
> an error. (And similarly for gcd.) This is because the lcm and gcd
> functions (these are in rings/arith.py) contain code like the following:
>
> if isinstance(a, list):
> return __LCM_list(a)
>
> I just changed all occurrences of the first of these lines in the lcm
> and gcd functions in my own installation to read
>
> if isinstance(a,list) or isinstance(a,tuple):
>
> and now I can find the lcm or gcd of a tuple just fine.
>
> Is there any reason I shouldn't do this? If not, I guess that this is a
> bug report/fix.
(1) You should use
if isinstance(a, (list, tuple)):
...
(2) Then you should send me a patch :-), since you want your change to
be in the next version of SAGE, right. Thanks.
sage: hg_sage.diff()
sage: hg_sage.ci()
sage: hg_sage.send('patchname')
(3) (Also, I feel that, ideally, lcm/gcd ought to be able to
> handle something like an xrange object, or, in general, any
> iterator/generator. But that is another issue.)
If we added that, would you be fine with gcd/lcm going into an
infinite loop in some cases if the iterator is infinite? Probably that is fine.
Yes, I think I'd be fine with adding what you suggest, i.e., lcm and
gcd also handling iterators.
Wiliam
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
