On 19-Sep-07, at 11:48 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:

>
>
> On 19-Sep-07, at 8:09 PM, William Stein wrote:
>
>>
>> On 9/19/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I am rather fond of the '..' operator, though I can see why people
>>> wouldn't want to add it as an official part of sage.  This got me to
>>
>> I think the decision about whether or not to include something like
>> this is definitely not decided yet.   I personally also really like
>> the
>> [a..b] notation, since I really enjoyed using it in Magma, and I
>> think perhaps the complaints about 0 or 1-based are misplaced,
>> because with the [a..b] notation one is being completely explicit
>> about the lower endpoint.   Also, the closed brackets very very
>> very strongly suggest "include the endpoint", like the do in standard
>> mathematical notation.  Also, I was not convinced that preparsing
>> [a..b] is not possible in general (though Nick was worried about
>> this).\
>
> It's not that it's not possible, it's that soon you have to parse
> arbitrary python code, or accept that you can break the preprocessor.
>
>> I am going to wait a while to see what brews up, even though
>> the majority vote was against [a..b].
>>
>> At a minimum I would like to implement that for the preparser (or
>> have somebody else do so), and see what it feels like to use in
>> practice
>> in Sage.
>
> I think tomorrow I will do this, and perhaps refactor the preparser
> slightly while I am there.  It seems like we should be able to use
> open and half open intervals, so not only
> [1..2] and (0..3) are valid but also are [0..2) and (0..2] are.

Having just read this, and thought about the ubiquity of parentheses,  
I think I'll try for

[1..2] and ]2..3[ instead :)  It looks alien, but it's more likely to  
parse.  Although in mathematical python code, square brackets are  
very common too :)

Nick

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to