> > Could you elaborate ? What's makes you skeptical ? > > Two things, mostly. The huge amount of code that wasn't being merged > -- that appears to now be merged :) And the whole categories/generic > code effort: while I support the ends, I'm worried that the system > will become so slow that it is unusable in practice. Which is > strange, because I'm not usually the one arguing for efficiency over > clarity!
The only thing It could make slow is the creation of some parent, since it only change inheritance. After that whether a methods is inherited from a class or another one shouldn't change anything in the speed. So unless (like me :-) you like creating new parent everything should be alright. Let me explain the smiley. I'm currently testing a conjecture whose input is a monoid so in the next windows on my screen sage it writing a lot of things and in particular creating a new monoid every two second. > >> But if you guys allow me to view a multivariate polynomial ring as a > >> module over its base ring I will be very grateful. > > > > Of course they are ! I have no clue about why you say that ? Could > > you explain > > yourself ? So what ? > > I know they are mathematically, but at the moment it's very hard to > take QQ['x', 'y'] and view it as a vector space over QQ. Essentially, > it's not easy to say that monomials x^i*y^j are the basis for some > free module over QQ, and have sage convert back and forth. But it > sounds like you can do that too! I remember fixing the very same problem in MuPAD a few years ago. I remember fixing it for matrices as well :-). That's typically a problem categories are designed to solve. Cheers, Florent -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
