#8860: incoherent types for real numbers
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: zimmerma | Owner: AlexGhitza
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: basic arithmetic | Keywords:
Author: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Comment(by jason):
Replying to [comment:2 zimmerma]:
> Jason,
>
> > The docstring for RealLiteral? indicates...
>
> how do you get this docstring?
> {{{
> sage: RealLiteral?
> Object `RealLiteral` not found.
> }}}
I was browsing the source. Since RealLiteral is not imported to the
global namespace (i.e., it appears to be only a preparser thing), you
can't get the docstring just by typing RealLiteral?. For me, it seems
like I can't even get the docstring with the full namespace path. Can you
try {{{sage.rings.real_mpfr.RealLiteral?}}}
>
> Anyway, I find it quite disturbing from the user point-of-view to see
this "preparsing" side-effect:
> {{{
> sage: type(n(1.2,prec=52))
> <type 'sage.rings.real_mpfr.RealNumber'>
> sage: type(n(1.2,prec=53))
> <type 'sage.rings.real_mpfr.RealLiteral'>
> sage: type(n(1.2,prec=54))
> <type 'sage.rings.real_mpfr.RealNumber'>
> }}}
I guess the underlying question is: why does the preparser have a special
type (i.e., subclass) of RealNumber that it creates, instead of just
creating a RealNumber? That question probably deserves a post to sage-
devel, since it's not immediately clear from the documentation.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8860#comment:3>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
