On 08/06/2018 19:53, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 7:59:39 AM UTC-7, Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
Personally, I'd vote for keeping ceil(), and not adding any alias.
I agree with this. Another philosophy (at which Sage should do a better
job) is to not have too much in the gl
On Saturday, June 9, 2018 at 2:53:56 AM UTC+9, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
> On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 7:59:39 AM UTC-7, Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
>>
>>
>> Personally, I'd vote for keeping ceil(), and not adding any alias.
>>
>
> I agree with this. Another philosophy (at which Sage should do a be
On Friday, June 8, 2018 at 7:59:39 AM UTC-7, Marc Mezzarobba wrote:
>
>
> Personally, I'd vote for keeping ceil(), and not adding any alias.
>
I agree with this. Another philosophy (at which Sage should do a better
job) is to not have too much in the global namespace. Because of Python, we
ha
John Cremona wrote:
> I hope it is not being suggested that we have to add tangent() as an
> alias to tan(), logoarithm() as an alias to log(), etc etc etc
I made the comparison with acos() because ceil() clearly is the usual
notation for me (I didn't know of any language or library calling it
c
