On 10 August 2018 at 12:22, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> On 2018-08-10, Erik Bray wrote:
> > I've never liked that there are constructors in Sage that are
> > functions but look like class names. I'd rather NumberField itself
> > were a class, with NumberField.__new__ acting as the
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 1:24 PM Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi Erik,
>
> On 2018-08-10, Erik Bray wrote:
> > I've never liked that there are constructors in Sage that are
> > functions but look like class names. I'd rather NumberField itself
> > were a class, with NumberField.__new__ acting as the
Hi Erik,
On 2018-08-10, Erik Bray wrote:
> I've never liked that there are constructors in Sage that are
> functions but look like class names. I'd rather NumberField itself
> were a class, with NumberField.__new__ acting as the factory. I
> suspect there is a reason it wasn't done that way
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:25 PM John Cremona wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10 August 2018 at 11:13, Erik Bray wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:46 PM Erik Bray wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:26 PM William Stein wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:20 AM, Simon King
>> > > wrote:
On 10 August 2018 at 11:13, Erik Bray wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:46 PM Erik Bray wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:26 PM William Stein wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:20 AM, Simon King
> wrote:
> > > > Hi Eric,
> > > >
> > > > On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
> > > >>
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:46 PM Erik Bray wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:26 PM William Stein wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:20 AM, Simon King wrote:
> > > Hi Eric,
> > >
> > > On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
> > >> But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:55 PM William Stein wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 7:04 AM, Erik Bray wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:23 PM Simon King wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Eric,
> >>
> >> On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
> >> > But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most Sage
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 7:04 AM, Erik Bray wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:23 PM Simon King wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
>> > But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most Sage
>> > classes--or at least those inheriting from SageObject, had some
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:26 PM William Stein wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:20 AM, Simon King wrote:
> > Hi Eric,
> >
> > On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
> >> But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most Sage
> >> classes--or at least those inheriting from SageObject,
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 6:20 AM, Simon King wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
>> But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most Sage
>> classes--or at least those inheriting from SageObject, had some
>> version of this .help() method. Although we already do a
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 3:23 PM Simon King wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
> > But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most Sage
> > classes--or at least those inheriting from SageObject, had some
> > version of this .help() method. Although we already
Hi Eric,
On 2018-08-09, Erik Bray wrote:
> But it got me thinking: Maybe it would actually be nice if most Sage
> classes--or at least those inheriting from SageObject, had some
> version of this .help() method. Although we already do a decent job
> advertising the ? and ?? syntax, having
12 matches
Mail list logo
