Dear Ralf, Waldek,
Due to other, by far more pressing issues, I'd like to stop work on this thread
for now. I should have put in large letters at the beginning:
This is a theoretical question, no need for action right now.
> I think, I stop here and wait for very concrete use cases of yours.
The concrete use case was to replace the 188 declarations of coerce by a
handful of declarations of CoercibleTo in the SPAD library. I think that this
would make the library more user-friendly, and could be a first step towards
removing i-coerce and i-coerfn.
But I hesitate to write
UnivariatePolynomial(var, R) == with Join(CoercibleTo SUP R,
CoercibleTo Polynomial R,
CoercibleTo DMP([var], R),
CoercibleTo MPOLY([var], R) ...)
This doesn't look right.
Martin
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
