On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Carl Witty wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Georg S. Weber
> <georgswe...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> But would you find it helpful to have the possibility to let it act
>> either "as gracefully as possible", or to "print out verbose
>> warnings" (coercions have costs, so if the costs are higher than a
>> specific amount, this could trigger an activity), or to "only do a
>> strict subset of coercions/coversions, and stop otherwise"?
>
> This sounds potentially very useful; but option 3 ("do a strict subset
> of coercions/conversions, and stop otherwise") is also tricky to
> implement. For instance, if you had a mode where GF(5)(3) == ZZ(3)
> raised a ValueError exception, then "GF(5)(3) in ZZ" would be false in
> that mode, where it's normally true; that doesn't seem like the sort
> of difference that would be helpful during debugging :)
>
Yes, I would find this very helpful - particularly option 3.
In that case why wouldn't
GF(5)(3) in ZZ
also return a ValueError?
Regards,
Bill Page.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
