On Mar 25, 8:26 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery" <nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr>
wrote:
> Dear Henryk, dear Mike,
<SNIP>
> Mike: could you pleeeeaaaase answer this e-mail???
Right now it is spring break at UW, so I expect Mike to pop up soon
again.
> We really really really don't want two separate implementations.
Well, I will not merge a second implementation as long as there is no
clear roadmap for resolving the problem. The code for the
LazyPowerSeries should not have been in combinat to begin with. The
ideal outcome of this would be a re-factored LazyPowerSeries in rings
somewhere. As is Henryk's code needs doctesting and definitely some
Sage-ization style wise, etc, so this will take some time either way.
> Henryk: could you please make sure that your implementation is as much
> as possible compatible with Mike, and implements all its functionality
> (or at least to make sure that the design does not prevent porting the
> missing bits). Then the transition will be easy.
Well, see above. Similar is not the goal here.
> > Also his class resides somewhere in combinat, where I wouldnt put a
> > general purpose powerseries package.
>
> (definitely this was just a temporary accident)
>
> > The class will be called InfinitePowerSeries(Ring).
>
> Thanks for your work on this!
>
> Best,
> Nicolas
Cheers,
Michael
> --
> Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
