On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:51:10 PM UTC+1, Marc Mezzarobba wrote: > > What about <, <=, etc.? Do you agree that they should fail when rather > than return a result with no mathematical meaning, even if the result is > clearly documented? >
I am divided between those operators being "mathematical" operators and "programming" operators. If I see them as "mathematical", I would agree that they should fail when there is no mathematical meaning. But if I see them as programming tool, I would expect that they give True/False results even when there is no mathematical meaning. > what I'm aksing is what benefit you see of > returning False instead of raising an error (in the case of !=). I see no benefit except consistency (that ==/!= operators do not raise exceptions.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
