Implement isdisjoint for finite sets
#41107
Conversation
pyrightconfig.json
Outdated
| "reportOptionalOperand": "warning", | ||
| "reportMissingImports": "warning", | ||
| "reportMissingModuleSource": "warning", | ||
| "strictParameterNoneValue": false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Many methods in cachefunc.pyi and otherwise as well use f=None and similar definitions.
|
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit f9f140f; changes) is ready! 🎉 |
|
I don't quite understand: are the changes below |
| return rich_to_bool(op, 0) | ||
| return rich_to_bool(op, -1) | ||
|
|
||
| def isdisjoint(self, other): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The standard in Sage is to add underscores between separate words in method names.
| def isdisjoint(self, other): | |
| def is_disjoint(self, other): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would suggest not to do this in this very special case, because Set is supposed to be a "better" set (it is not, in my opinion, but it tries), and it is set.isdisjoint rather than set.is_disjoint.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm afraid I have to take this back, the situation in sage is already chaotic :-(
Set (and FrozenBitset) indeed implements issubset etc., but there are some classes (MutablePoset, ManifoldSubset, RealSet, I couldn't find any others) that implement is_subset. In #41113, another class is going to implement is_subset.
It is not clear to me what's best.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suppose fundamentally we should make a choice and then rename/deprecate. For the time being, implementing both could be alright (it's just an extra line isdisjoint = is_disjoint in the class).
3 participants
Fixes #41045.
📝 Checklist
⌛ Dependencies