Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
#8704 closed enhancement (fixed)
Improve the _repr_ of IntegerRange
Reported by: | hivert | Owned by: | hivert |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-4.4.4 |
Component: | combinatorics | Keywords: | integer range |
Cc: | Merged in: | sage-4.4.4.alpha0 | |
Authors: | Florent Hivert | Reviewers: | Mike Hansen |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
The actual printing was discussed on this thread of sage-combinat-devel.
I also took the chance of normalizing the input to improve equality.
Attachments (1)
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Keywords integer range added
- Milestone set to sage-4.4.2
- Status changed from new to needs_review
- Type changed from defect to enhancement
comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by
comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by
I fixed the following issues raised by Nicolas on sage-combinat-devel
> >> The output of IntegerRange is much nicer now. I was about to put a > >> positive review, when I had a last doubt about the consistency between: > >> > >> sage: I = IntegerRange(2,100,5); I > >> {2, 7 .. 97} > >> sage: I = IntegerRange(54,Infinity,3); I > >> {54, 57, ..} > >> > >> Should there be a comma in both cases, in none, or is it good as is? > > > > I would say {2, 7 .. 97} should be replaced by {2, 7, .., 97} for > > consistency.
Changed 9 years ago by
comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by
- Reviewers set to Mike Hansen
- Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
Looks good to me.
comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by
- Merged in set to sage-4.4.4.alpha0
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
I fixed a doctest failure... All tests should pass now.