On Nov 26, 2007, at 2:04 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: >> >> I still think _verify_canonical_coercion_c is the wrong thing to use >> here, there is no reason that x._sage_() and y._sage_() should have >> the same parent (e.g. one could be an element of SR, the other a sage >> Integer), and at this point we should be able to succeed even if they >> don't have the same parent by (re-)calling the Sage coercion model on >> the Sage elements. > > Yes, I also think it's a bug somewhere else in SAGE. If you are able > to figure it out, > I am curious about it. Try my first patch, that will segfault. My > second patch passes fine.
See http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/1189/sympy-coerce.patch This on top of 2.8.14 + sympy.patch works great. (I wasn't able to cleanly apply sympy2.patch which looks like it had some useful non- coercion stuff in there as well.) I'm curious about your infinite recursion bug for looking up the _sage_ attribute... - Robert --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
