On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Martin Albrecht <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > at > > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11764 > > Paul Zimmermann writes: > > """ > for univariate polynomials we have the class Polynomial: > > sage: R.<x> = QQ[] > sage: isinstance(x+1, Polynomial) > True > However for multivariate polynomials we have to write: > > sage: R.<x,y> = QQ[] > sage: isinstance(x+y, sage.rings.polynomial.multi_polynomial.MPolynomial) > True > I suggest MPolynomial is defined as an alias for > sage.rings.polynomial.multi_polynomial.MPolynomial so that we can > simply write: > > sage: R.<x,y> = QQ[] > sage: isinstance(x+y, MPolynomial) > True > """ > > I suggested this needs a discussion on [sage-devel] because it's about > adding *more* stuff to the global namespace, while we try to keep that > to a minimum.
Random Thoughts: Since we banned using "is_MPolynomial", and we do have Polynomial in the global namespace, I can't see an alternative to having MPolynomial. That said, it's perhaps bad that we have Polynomial in the global namespace. I wonder how many people have done: sage: Polynomial(2) boom! sage: Polynomial([1,2,3]) boom! sage: Polynomial(QQ,[1,2,3]) boom! sage: Polynomial? pages, with nothing about how to make a polynomial using "the Polynomial command"... -- William -- To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
