On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 05:58:17AM -0700, Henryk Trappmann wrote:
>
> On Mar 26, 5:07 am, mabshoff <mabsh...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Well, I will not merge a second implementation as long as there is no
> > clear roadmap for resolving the problem.
>
> The basic functionality of Mike's powerseries class is also contained
> in my class.
> That is add, multiply, power, composition, shift, differentiate and
> integrate.
> I also changed my implementation that now a recursive define is
> possible according to Ralf Hemmecke's suggestion in this thread.
Great! I guess that the species code should make for a good test suite
for this feature.
> I can incorporate any additional functionality from Mike's
> implementation after consulting him, also about about sage style and
> conventions etc.
>
> Is this a roadmap of resolving the problem? Or is there a special need
> to start with Mike's implementation as base?
Following the same syntax is a definite plus unless there is a very
good reason for deviating. As for the implementation, just see this
with Mike (there might be tricks, typically around pickling) that you
might want to recycle.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
