On 15 Dez., 01:55, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu> wrote: > I would strongly object to removing the ability to iterate over > infinite sets, sometimes it's very useful to iterate until something > is found, or to grab a certain number of elements. I would be OK with > ZZ.list() throwing an exception as long as "for x in ZZ" still worked > just fine.
+1 There's a slight difference between infinite and [non-]enumerable sets you know... ;-) What about requiring a 'count' parameter to .list() if [we know that] the set is not finite? -Leif -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
