Hello everyone,
so we all agree that adding these structures to CM would be
compartively easy (reusing what has been done with
FieldElement/Field). Whether it would be useful is another issue...
>
> What is most interesting is the example use cases. I think we all
> know that it is straightforward
On 10/3/11 10:23 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>> I would be curious to see how such a class would actually help you. I have
>> to admit that a big part of my curiosity is due to the fact that I don't
>> understand how it really would help. It could be, as you say, beautiful but
>> useful is somet
On 10/4/11 5:42 PM, Greg Sterijevski wrote:
> Pardon my ignorance of Abelian Fields, but what would be a use of this set
> of classes? Do they simplify some calculation or make some code faster? The
> question is, "are they numerical?"
We can all look at Sebastien's use cases to assess general
use
Pardon my ignorance of Abelian Fields, but what would be a use of this set
of classes? Do they simplify some calculation or make some code faster? The
question is, "are they numerical?"
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 03/10/2011 19:50, Mikkel Meyer Andersen a écrit :
>
Le 03/10/2011 19:50, Mikkel Meyer Andersen a écrit :
2011/10/3 Sébastien Brisard:
I would be curious to see how such a class would actually help you. I have
to admit that a big part of my curiosity is due to the fact that I don't
understand how it really would help. It could be, as you say, be
Thanks for the link! It seems very interesting, I'll give it a try!
Sébastien
2011/10/4 Axel :
> 2011/10/3 Sébastien Brisard :
>> Hello,
>> I'm using quite extensively the Field/FieldElement interfaces, but am
>> sometimes feeling the need for less stringent sets like Abelian Groups
>> (no multipl
2011/10/3 Sébastien Brisard :
> Hello,
> I'm using quite extensively the Field/FieldElement interfaces, but am
> sometimes feeling the need for less stringent sets like Abelian Groups
> (no multiplication) and Rings (no division). This would allow me to
> carry out some calculations on different ty
2011/10/3 Sébastien Brisard :
>> I would be curious to see how such a class would actually help you. I have
>> to admit that a big part of my curiosity is due to the fact that I don't
>> understand how it really would help. It could be, as you say, beautiful but
>> useful is sometimes are more di
I am interested. Not convinced, but interested.
2011/10/3 Sébastien Brisard
> If you are still interested, I'll post (not commit, I got the
> message!!!) tentative interfaces once I've written them.
>
> I would be curious to see how such a class would actually help you. I have
> to admit that a big part of my curiosity is due to the fact that I don't
> understand how it really would help. It could be, as you say, beautiful but
> useful is sometimes are more difficult goal with these things.
>
I would be curious to see how such a class would actually help you. I have
to admit that a big part of my curiosity is due to the fact that I don't
understand how it really would help. It could be, as you say, beautiful but
useful is sometimes are more difficult goal with these things.
I would a
2011/10/3 Sébastien Brisard :
> 2011/10/3 Phil Steitz :
>> On 10/3/11 7:00 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I'm using quite extensively the Field/FieldElement interfaces, but am
>>> sometimes feeling the need for less stringent sets like Abelian Groups
>>> (no multiplication) and Rings (
2011/10/3 Phil Steitz :
> On 10/3/11 7:00 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I'm using quite extensively the Field/FieldElement interfaces, but am
>> sometimes feeling the need for less stringent sets like Abelian Groups
>> (no multiplication) and Rings (no division). This would allow me to
On 10/3/11 7:00 AM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
> Hello,
> I'm using quite extensively the Field/FieldElement interfaces, but am
> sometimes feeling the need for less stringent sets like Abelian Groups
> (no multiplication) and Rings (no division). This would allow me to
> carry out some calculations
14 matches
Mail list logo
