> I assume Florent's point can be summarized as follow: in the context > of Sage, and in particular of categories, the general Python rule > "explicit is better than implicit" is to be taken with a grain of > salt. Basically, "explicit" should be interpreted as "explicit from > the code or from the math context".
Tricks like this one makes it hard for people to work with category code, and in particular to learn how it works by looking at the code. Somebody said previously on this thread that "if somebody is playing with categories, then he must have read the manual first" and I believe that this is already wrong. Sometimes, you (= I ) have to deal with category code, even though you do not know what it is, just because you encounter a bug or because some part of the code forces you to do something with categories (facades in Posets, for instance ?). That's why you have standards like that, to make sure that everybody can coexist and work together. To me it's a bit like for global variables. It's correct code, it compiles, but it is hard to guess the source of the problem when you are fighting with a bug. Even if it is documented somewhere, as you have no idea what you are looking for exactly. Making the link explicit is exactly the hint you need to tell you where you should go in order to understand what happens. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
