I was expecting someone more pedantic than me to point out that this set is not a field in the mathematical sense. Since this is a big change anyway (at least to a lot of doctest outputs) should we think more carefully about what we want to call RR? Instead of "Real floating-point field with x bits of precision" we could have "Real floating-point numbers with x bits of precision" perhaps. (With an implied "The set of" in front).
John On Thursday, October 15, 2020 at 9:04:55 AM UTC+1 Kwankyu Lee wrote: > +1 as well of course. A harder question is whether we are ready to >> replace the Python names RealField and RR with RealFloatingField and >> RFF, so that the names RealField and RR could be used for the genuine >> real field. >> > > I wonder if there is a real prospect that the genuine real field is ever > implemented. If not, then we lose the name RealField for good... > > > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/2fd10f7c-4e65-4800-b32f-e7b208ad63cbn%40googlegroups.com.
