On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, William Stein wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:08 PM, Jason Grout
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Currently most elements of QQbar are printed in interval notation:
>>
>> [-2.0741620076681855 .. -2.0741620076681850] + [1.7722625415877633 ..
>> 1.7722625415877638]*I
>>
>> When dealing with lots of these, or when dealing with matrices and
>> vectors of QQbar elements, this quickly becomes overwhelming because of
>> the massive amount of almost-the-same numbers, the extra brackets, etc.
>> What do people think of printing QQbar elements in a different way
>> (thanks to cwitty for suggesting the question mark syntax):
>>
>> 1. Appending a question mark after the last unquestionable digit an
>> interval: -2.074162007668185? + 1.772262541587763?*I
>>
>> 2. Appending a question mark after the first questionable digit of an
>> interval: -2.0741620076681853? + 1.7722625415877636?*I
>>
>> 3. Printing the center of each interval in angle brackets:
>> <-2.0741620076681853 + 1.7722625415877636*I>
>>
>> 4. Just print the center of the interval, with no indication that we
>> actually have an exact QQbar element: -2.0741620076681853 +
>> 1.7722625415877636*I
>>
>> Any better ideas?
>>
>> The nice thing about option 4 is that one can then copy and paste and
>> get a fairly good approximation for the QQbar element. However, the
>> other options are nice in that they signify that we have an exact
>> algebraic value rather than a floating point approximation.
>>
>
> Personally I really like the ? notation.
>
> William
>
+1. I've been using matrices over QQbar a lot recently, and the output has
been bugging me.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
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://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
