Re: [sage-devel] Is anybody using set_coercion_model()?
I was one of the original authors, and removing the possibility of additional models sounds fine to me. I agree that nobody's going to implement them at this point. David On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:26 AM, John Cremona wrote: > On 14 March 2017 at 12:10, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > The coercion model in Sage seems to be designed to allow it to be > changed: > > there is a global object coercion_model defined in element.pyx which can > be > > get/set using get_coercion_model() and set_coercion_model(). So *in > theory* > > it is possible to implement a different coercion model. > > > > However, in practice I think that: > > 1. There is no need for an alternative coercion model. > > 2. Many places in Sage assume specific behaviour about the coercion > model, > > so changing it would break lots of things. > > > > So I suggest to drop support for a changable coercion model. One > advantage > > is that we could just import the "coercion_model" global instead of > needing > > to call get_coercion_model() every time. This would lead to cleaner and > > faster code. > > > > What do you think? > > Sounds like a good idea to me. Would one of the original authors like > to comment? It is rather unlikely that anyone else knows of this > possibility, and (as you say) the chances of it working are rather > remote. > > > > > > > Jeroen. > > > > -- > > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [sage-devel] Is anybody using set_coercion_model()?
On 14 March 2017 at 12:10, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > The coercion model in Sage seems to be designed to allow it to be changed: > there is a global object coercion_model defined in element.pyx which can be > get/set using get_coercion_model() and set_coercion_model(). So *in theory* > it is possible to implement a different coercion model. > > However, in practice I think that: > 1. There is no need for an alternative coercion model. > 2. Many places in Sage assume specific behaviour about the coercion model, > so changing it would break lots of things. > > So I suggest to drop support for a changable coercion model. One advantage > is that we could just import the "coercion_model" global instead of needing > to call get_coercion_model() every time. This would lead to cleaner and > faster code. > > What do you think? Sounds like a good idea to me. Would one of the original authors like to comment? It is rather unlikely that anyone else knows of this possibility, and (as you say) the chances of it working are rather remote. > > > Jeroen. > > -- > 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[sage-devel] Is anybody using set_coercion_model()?
The coercion model in Sage seems to be designed to allow it to be changed: there is a global object coercion_model defined in element.pyx which can be get/set using get_coercion_model() and set_coercion_model(). So *in theory* it is possible to implement a different coercion model. However, in practice I think that: 1. There is no need for an alternative coercion model. 2. Many places in Sage assume specific behaviour about the coercion model, so changing it would break lots of things. So I suggest to drop support for a changable coercion model. One advantage is that we could just import the "coercion_model" global instead of needing to call get_coercion_model() every time. This would lead to cleaner and faster code. What do you think? Jeroen. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
