On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:42:35PM -0800, Nick Alexander wrote:
> Two things, mostly. The huge amount of code that wasn't being
> merged -- that appears to now be merged :)
For a good part, that was just an instance of a general issue with
Sage's slow review process (and I don't have good suggestions to
improve it, except to make it technically easier, as has been
discussed on the list, in order to encourage more reviewers).
> And the whole categories/generic code effort: while I support the
> ends, I'm worried that the system will become so slow that it is
> unusable in practice. Which is strange, because I'm not usually the
> one arguing for efficiency over clarity!
Well, give it a shot! I would very much would like to get reports on
slowness that can be attributed to the category code :-)
Besides what Florent says about creation of parents, there is another
issue: category code cannot be fully cyphoned, because Cython does not
support multiple inheritance. But a Cython class still can use generic
code from categories (see e.g. sage.categories.examples.semigroups_cython)
> I know they are mathematically, but at the moment it's very hard to
> take QQ['x', 'y'] and view it as a vector space over QQ.
> Essentially, it's not easy to say that monomials x^i*y^j are the
> basis for some free module over QQ, and have sage convert back and
> forth.
Or better directly have a basis and basis related operations in
QQ['x','y']; as Florent said, making QQ['x','y'] an
AlgebrasWithBasis(QQ) is in the plans, and help is welcome :-)
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
