On 2017-08-08 00:43, Stefan wrote:
P.S. The Graph class does way too much sorting. See e.g.
sage.graphs.generic_graph.GenericGraph.vertices()
I created https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22349 for that.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel"
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Daniel Krenn wrote:
> On 2017-08-07 22:53, David Roe wrote:
>> >>> sorted([1,2,'a'])
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> File "", line 1, in
>> TypeError: '<' not supported between instances of 'str' and 'int'
>> [...]
>> Which
On 2017-08-07 22:53, David Roe wrote:
> >>> sorted([1,2,'a'])
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "", line 1, in
> TypeError: '<' not supported between instances of 'str' and 'int'
> [...]
> Which still leaves the second part of Stefan's question: how do we get
>
On Mon, 7 Aug 2017, David Roe wrote:
Yet for a user looking at the examples of using such a function, it's nicer to
see
sage: my_func(inputs) # unordered
[A, C, B]
rather than
sage: set([str(c) for c in my_func(inputs)]) == set(["A","B","C"])
True
Maybe just
EXAMPLES::
sage:
> What bad practice are you referring to? The output of some functions are
> lists where the ordering is somewhat unpredictable. This different
> ordering can reveal itself in testing on different platforms, or with a
> changed package that Sage depends on. Yet for a user looking at the
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 23:11, David Roe wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
>> 20100.delecr...@gmail.com
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 7,
On 07/08/2017 23:11, David Roe wrote:
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
20100.delecr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:>
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <
>> 20100.delecr...@gmail.com
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
On 07/08/2017 22:53, David Roe wrote:
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
integers should compare the same as python ints
I agree and with Python 3 you get an error
$ python
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
>
>> integers should compare the same as python ints
>>
> I agree and with Python 3 you get an error
>
> $ python
> Python 3.6.2 (default, Jul 20
On 07/08/2017 19:47, David Roe wrote:> But I think that Sage
integers should compare the same as python ints
I agree and with Python 3 you get an error
$ python
Python 3.6.2 (default, Jul 20 2017, 03:52:27)
[GCC 7.1.1 20170630] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more
This does seem to be new. In Sage 7.2 (just one that I had handy),
sage: sorted([1,2,'a'])
[1, 2, 'a']
sage: sorted([1r,2r,'a'])
[1, 2, 'a']
This isn't that surprising, since the semantics of comparison have been
changing because of the upcoming switch to python 3. But I think that Sage
integers
12 matches
Mail list logo