it shows, by the way, that idea to use set() (or Set()) to remedy differences in docstrings with the output of randomised procedures, discussed here: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/1f688f25bdd5dab2 does not really fly.
On Jan 30, 10:38 am, kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> wrote: > On #7325, we are getting hardware or software-dependent results, which > are easy to deal with as the results are equivalent, but which raises > the question of how to correctly use of Python's set(). > > On sage.math: > sage: set((x,y)) > set([y, x]) > > On my Macintel 10.5: > sage: set((x,y)) > set([x, y]) > > Then when one makes an iterator, it becomes dependent on this. set() > is a pure Python thing, I believe. Can anyone shed light on this - to > be precise, how to avoid this dependence in making an iterator without > (say) sorting? Has this ever caused problems in Sage before? > > Thanks for any insight on this Python question! > > - kcrisman -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
