> This is definitely not a bug. The definition of the _add_ method > absolutely demands that both inputs have exactly the same parent. In > the above instance, the left hand input (=1) has parent ZZ, and the > right hand input (=SR(2)) has parent the symbolic ring.
Yeah, I know that-- it's the violation of that assumption which ultimately crashed the OP's code, after all. I guess I've inherited the bias from Python that users shouldn't be able to segfault the interpreter from pure Python code. Anything Cythonic probably falls into the Sage equivalent of the "ctypes exception" class, and I guess you can get the same crash with any non-typechecking cpdef'd object, but it still feels wrong. Meh. Doug -- To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org
