Eric says *I'm all for more operators supported by syntax* This sounds like a terrible idea to me. I assume you do not endorse ALL operators. Just look at the machine-level operations available in a typical CPU. Also look at the kinds of syntax freely invented by physicists, chemists, and mathematicians.
Alternatively you can make up any subroutine name you like, and define it as meaning 1/x. If python does not allow this to be done efficiently (by method dispatch, macro-expansion, function call or whatever...) then THAT is a substantial problem with Python (or Sage). The lack of agreement on what is meant by "~" seems to miss the point. It could be that there is a big audience for accessing "flipper" via Sage. But it seems to me that people studying "the action of mapping classes on laminations on punctured surfaces using ideal triangulation coordinates. " are probably not so dense that they couldn't be taught to use functional/prefix notation so as to avoid conflict with programming language syntax. RJF -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
