Karim Belabas on Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:32:53 +0100 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: Proposal to extend primes() |
* Jeroen Demeyer [2016-03-16 10:21]: > Hello pari-dev, > > I propose to have a 2-argument version of primes() such that > primes(a,b) would be equivalent to the current primes([a,b]). > Moreover, we could make the first argument optional and make > primes(,n) equivalent to primes(2, n) and return the list of all > primes <= n. > > What do you think? What is the intent ? Currently - primes(n) returns all primes <= n - primes([a, b]) returns all primes in the interval [a,b] To save two keystrokes (the [ and ]) at the expense of a (IMHO) more cryptic interface ? Currently a single argument describes the interval (as in e.g. polrealroots), and I had thought about adding another optional one to specify an arithmetic progression, e.g. primes([a,b], Mod(c,q)) (N.B. the current forprime has an internal variant supporting this, which I was about to export as forprimestep(p = a, b, Mod(c,q),...) ) Cheers, K.B. -- Karim Belabas, IMB (UMR 5251) Tel: (+33) (0)5 40 00 26 17 Universite de Bordeaux Fax: (+33) (0)5 40 00 69 50 351, cours de la Liberation http://www.math.u-bordeaux.fr/~kbelabas/ F-33405 Talence (France) http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/ [PARI/GP] `