#9049: v4.4.1 bug in variety() over finite field extensions of Q?
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
   Reporter:  cynthia_vinzant     |       Owner:  AlexGhitza  
       Type:  defect              |      Status:  needs_review
   Priority:  major               |   Milestone:  sage-4.6.1  
  Component:  linear algebra      |    Keywords:              
     Author:  Andrey Novoseltsev  |    Upstream:  N/A         
   Reviewer:  Burcin Erocal       |      Merged:              
Work_issues:                      |  
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------

Comment(by burcin):

 `Sequence`s are lists:
 {{{
 sage: t = Sequence([1..5])
 sage: isinstance(t, list)
 True
 }}}

 Explicitly checking for the condition you are testing is better than trial
 and error. You cannot know the meaning of the `ValueError` returned from
 the base rings `__call__` method, especially in such a generic setting.

 IMHO, that `try` & `except` block should be cleaned up. However it's hard
 to do so as it is, since this is a generic constructor, there are no
 doctests or specification of what the acceptable input is and doctesting
 the whole sage library takes hours on my laptop.

 Please reconsider my suggestion, with the "better safe then sorry" motto
 in mind.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9049#comment:12>
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.

Reply via email to