Rational numbers

[mensanator at aol.com]

On Feb 23, 2:00 pm, cas... at comcast.net wrote:
> On Feb 23, 10:34 am, "mensana... at aol.com" <mensana... at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 10:39 am, Martin Manns <mma... at gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:52:06 -0600
>
> > > Larry Bates <lba... at websafe.com> wrote:
> > > > I quick search of Google turned up:
>
> > > >http://books.google.com/books?id=1Shx_VXS6ioC&pg=PA625&lpg=PA625&dq=p...
> > > >http://calcrpnpy.sourceforge.net/clnum.html
> > > >http://gmpy.sourceforge.net/
>
> > > Sorry that I did not point these out initially.
>
> > > + clnum seems to be slower and for speed may be compiled to wrap gmp so
> > > that it is just an additional layer between python and gmp .
>
> > > + gmpy is looking pretty unmaintained (dead) to me (newest update of
> > > cvs 10 months ago).
>
> I worked with Alex Martelli (gmpy's maintainer) to fix a bug found by
> mensanator. With Alex's permission, I released it as gmpy 1.04a. Alex
> has not updated cvs with the fix.
>
> gmpy 1.04a compiles cleanly with the latest releases of Python and
> GMP, so I consider it stable.

Am I hallucinating? Didn't I see at least some version
of gmpy for Python 2.5 on SourceForge awhile back?
I distinctly remember thinking that I don't have to
direct people to your site, but SourceForge is not
showing anything beyond vesion 1.01 for Python 2.4.


>
> > Actually, gmpy is being maitained even if SourceForge isn't up to
> > date.
>
> > I got my gmpy 1.04a for Python 2.5 Windows binary from
>
> > <http://home.comcast.net/~casevh>
>
> > I haven't used the rationals all that much, but been very
> > happy with them when I have.
>
> casevh