An alternative would be to make standard Python functions (such as count) return Integer objects, but this would make it incompatible with vanilla Python.
On Jan 18, 11:33 pm, Nils Bruin <nbr...@sfu.ca> wrote: > On Jan 18, 1:20 am, Simon King <simon.k...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > > > On the other hand, eventually we will have Python 3.*, and thus why > > should I not get used to write int(i/j) instead of i/j, for `int`s i > > and j? > > Because it can give the wrong answer :-). In Python 3: > > >>> int(10**40/10**10) > > 1000000000000000019884624838656 > > Python 3's division for integers is quite unsuitable for a computer > algebra system. In a way, the 2.* division at least has the advantage > it was an operation that has a proper mathematical definition. In > python 3 it can even fail: > > >>> int(10**1000/10**10) > > OverflowError: int/int too large for a float -- 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
