> I really think that this is illogical. Don't you ? No, because it's perfectly consistent.
I can see why it's not obvious, though -- and for related reasons, in Python 3 the division of two ints produces a float (or in Python 2 if you `from __future__ import division`). That won't help us much though because we need to preprocess ints into Integers anyway. > I guess that here there are some Sage-type conversions coming from ``+/- > 1*...``. Yep. You're multiplying a Sage Integer by a Python integer, which produces a Sage Integer. > From my point of view, using in Sage, ``randint`` should produce Sage > integers and not Python integer. Not an unreasonable expectation, although I would probably suggest using a different name for the function instead to prevent confusion with random.randint. But in the case of integers, you could also get a random integer right from ZZ instead (with randrange behaviour instead of randint): sage: ZZ.random_element(10, 20) 13 So I could take or leave adding another function. Doug -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.
