Robert Bradshaw wrote: > I've fixed this (patch forthcoming). I don't think we can do > something that always does the "right" thing for floating points > though, as > > sage: sum([1.1]*10) < 11 > True > sage: sum([1.3]*10) > 13 > True > > This is NOT a bug in Sage so much as an artifact of the way computers > store floating point numbers. Now, with the decimal literal thing > that I was toying with, perhaps we could do accurate sranges anyways. > > - Robert >
Yes. That is evident, but in my simple example the endpoint should be included. > > On Sep 21, 2007, at 6:59 AM, Jaap Spies wrote: > >> The new (fast) srange function with include_endpoint=True >> dus not include the endpoint in some cases: >> >> sage: srange(1.0, 5.0, include_endpoint=True) >> [1.00000000000000, 2.00000000000000, 3.00000000000000, >> 4.00000000000000] >> >> Jaap >> Jaap --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
