Opened 8 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
#5047 closed defect (fixed)
[with patch, positive review] comparing complex i raises error
Reported by: | burcin | Owned by: | somebody |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-3.3 |
Component: | basic arithmetic | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Reviewers: | ||
Report Upstream: | Work issues: | ||
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
sage: cmp(i,0) TypeError Traceback (most recent call last) /home/burcin/sage/sage-3.2.3/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/functions/functions.pyc in __cmp__(self, right) 267 return 0 268 R = RealField() --> 269 c = cmp(R(self), R(right)) 270 if c: return c 271 try: ... /home/burcin/sage/sage-3.2.3/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/functions/constants.pyc in _mpfr_(self, R) 865 TypeError 866 """ --> 867 raise TypeError 868 869 def _real_rqdf_(self, R): TypeError:
Attachments (2)
Change History (8)
comment:1 follow-up: ↓ 2 Changed 8 years ago by
comment:2 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 8 years ago by
- Summary changed from comparing complex i raises error to [with patch, needs review] comparing complex i raises error
Replying to SimonKing:
In Python, one gets
>>> cmp(1j,0) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> TypeError: no ordering relation is defined for complex numbers
With the patch, one gets
sage: cmp(i,0) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TypeError Traceback (most recent call last) /home/king/.sage/temp/mpc739/25379/_home_king__sage_init_sage_0.py in <module>() ----> 1 2 3 4 5 /home/king/SAGE/devel/sage-3.2.1/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sage/functions/functions.pyc in __cmp__(self, right) 270 c = cmp(R(self), R(right)) 271 except TypeError: --> 272 raise TypeError, "these objects are not comparable" 273 if c: return c 274 try: TypeError: these objects are not comparable
which, I believe, is consistent with python.
Other comparisons still work:
sage: cmp(i^2,0) -1 sage: cmp(e,0) 1
comment:3 follow-up: ↓ 4 Changed 8 years ago by
- Cc was added
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs review] comparing complex i raises error to [with patch, positive review pending changes] comparing complex i raises error
I ran into this when testing new printing code in pynac. ATM, pynac uses the sign function, which is defined to be cmp(x, 0), to determine if it should print a minus sign. Thus, we have the following:
sage: var('x',ns=1) sage: i*x <boom>
I somehow thought that the cmp function was not supposed to raise exceptions, but googling shortly didn't turn up any evidence to support this argument.
I would be ok to live with this fact, and try to figure out a better way to handle the sign function, or printing in pynac.
BTW, the sign function is also mentioned here: #777
I give the attached patch a positive review, provided that doctests are added to test for the new error message.
Changed 8 years ago by
comment:4 in reply to: ↑ 3 Changed 8 years ago by
The second patch cmp_doc.patch
(to be applied after the first patch) adds more documentation.
Replying to burcin:
I ran into this when testing new printing code in pynac. ATM, pynac uses the sign function, which is defined to be cmp(x, 0), to determine if it should print a minus sign. Thus, we have the following:
sage: var('x',ns=1) sage: i*x <boom>
Ok, but I think there should be a different approach for determining the sign when printing an imaginary number.
However, personally I believe that sign(I)
should raise an error.
I somehow thought that the cmp function was not supposed to raise exceptions, but googling shortly didn't turn up any evidence to support this argument.
... and, as I mentioned above, cmp
does raise an exception in Python.
BTW, the sign function is also mentioned here: #777
The sign
function defined in #777 would simply return 0 on non-real constants, because it tests bool(x > 0)
. Indeed, we have
sage: bool(I > 0) False sage: bool(I < 0) False
so, at least it does not go boom (which it should, though!).
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by
- Cc was removed
- Summary changed from [with patch, positive review pending changes] comparing complex i raises error to [with patch, positive review] comparing complex i raises error
Positive review, both patches should be applied.
comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Merged in Sage 3.3.alpha2
I believe this ticket is close to being invalid, because Sage is nearly consistent with Python.
In Python, one gets
Only I would say that the error message in Sage could be clearer. So, I suggest to catch the error and reraise a TypeError? with an appropriate error message.