#18940: Polynomials ignore the step argument in __getitem__
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: pbruin | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_info
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.10
Component: algebra | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Peter Bruin | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/pbruin/18940-getitem_step | 1c56779b3140d12fbe5d0973cdcad0ac9dbb8054
Dependencies: #19409 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by pbruin):
Replying to [comment:34 jdemeyer]:
> Replying to [comment:29 pbruin]:
> I think you are totally misunderstanding me. This is not at all about in
''which order'' the monomials are extracted. Obviously, PARI's `Vecrev()`
is the right thing, I'm not arguing against that.
>
> It's about
> {{{
> 9*x^9 + 8*x^8 + 7*x^7 + 6*x^6 + 5*x^5 + 4*x^4 + 3*x^3 + 2*x^2
> }}}
> versus
> {{{
> 9*x^7 + 8*x^6 + 7*x^5 + 6*x^4 + 5*x^3 + 4*x^2 + 3*x + 2
> }}}
OK, I see. As you can guess from how I interpreted your proposal, for me
this is not the expected answer at all.
I would personally be quite happy with just deprecating the `start` and
`stop` parameters and allowing polynomial slicing only for `pol[:n]`, i.e.
truncation. I think users can easily implement other forms of slicing via
lists.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18940#comment:42>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" 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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
