[sage-devel] Re: PowerSeries element class appears in the TAB completion

When you open a ticket, please add it to https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/25383 (Meta-ticket: deprecate useless or misleading functions in the global namespace ) On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 7:59:51 PM UTC-7 Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > I don't think

[sage-devel] Re: PowerSeries element class appears in the TAB completion

I don't think such classes were meant to get into the public namespace as they are not so useful (such as promoting a polynomial to a power series). Indeed, as you say, these classes should not be created directly (as they do not have a redirect to pass data to a parent; cf.

[sage-devel] default interact widget for single value

Thanks to a lot of good work a few years back, we have fairly close alignment between historic @interact behavior on the Jupyter notebook (from ipywidgets) and the previous sagenb behavior. Sage cell server and CoCalc Sage worksheets are very close indeed. One fairly glaring difference I'm

Re: [sage-devel] Re: overloading * for Set intersection

Sorry, I did not find anything about this in the docs for Sets (but I should have tried the operators for Python sets). Guillermo On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 20:25, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > -1 on this; as Sébastien says, we already have overloaded the bitwise > operators &, | for this -- which is

[sage-devel] Re: overloading * for Set intersection

-1 on this; as Sébastien says, we already have overloaded the bitwise operators &, | for this -- which is consistent with Python's operators for set and frozenset - https://docs.python.org/3/library/stdtypes.html#set (Note Python's set and frozenset do not support +.) On Tuesday, March 29, 2022

[sage-devel] PowerSeries element class appears in the TAB completion

Hello everybody, During my normal uses of SageMath, I observed that the class "PowerSeries" appears in the TAB completion: sage: PowerSeries[TAB] PowerSeries PowerSeriesRing However this is the base class for the

[sage-devel] Re: overloading * for Set intersection

Why not use "&" and "|" ? sage: A = Set([1,2,3,4,5]) sage: B = Set([3,4,5,6,7]) sage: A & B {3, 4, 5} sage: A | B {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7} On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 11:34:14 AM UTC+2 GMS wrote: > > I have noticed the overloading of + for Set union, which I find very > convenient. > >

[sage-devel] overloading * for Set intersection

I have noticed the overloading of + for Set union, which I find very convenient. Correspondingly, I would like to propose the overloading of * for Set intersection. It seems to me that it suffices to modify local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/sage/sets/set.py by adding in class