On Thursday, January 10, 2013 8:38:56 AM UTC-6, Nathann Cohen wrote: > > > i.e. log2 is already defined to equal log(2) (to base e!). We are > > already inconsistent, since log2 is a symbolic constant meaning > > log(2), whereas there are *already* functions in Sage whenre log2 > > means log-to-the-base-2: > > > > sage: RR(32).log2() > > 5.00000000000000 > > Ahahaahahahahahahahahahaah :-DDDDDDDDDDDD > > So ? What do we burn ? :-P > > (if log2 becomes a function, it should break all code using it as a > constant, which is nice. And as log2() will raise an error too, I'd say > that we are safe if we change log2(x) to log(x,2))
I don't see why we have to burn anything. Why not define log_2 and log_10? Aren't those legitimate identifiers? The only objection I can see to this is the ISO standard mentioned above, in which case. I wasn't aware we were following ISO standards, though. john perry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
