Hi Jason, On 8 Jun., 14:41, Jason Grout <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd rather have a one-stop place for coercion documentation, so I'd > rather have it in the coercion section of the reference manual. It > might be good to put pointers in the other places for "A short guide to > implementing coercion" in the reference.
I really wonder if it makes sense to fit a text on the implementation of parents and elements with coercion and category *into the reference manual*? I doubt that the result could be called a one-step place. The point is that the reference manual seems mainly structured according to the modules of Sage. Note that http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/coercion.html already slightly violates that rule, because it provides a common text for at least three modules of Sage, namely sage.structure.coerce, sage.structure.coerce_actions and sage.structure.coerce_maps In addition to that, the text that I'm writing will relate with sage.structure.parent, sage.structure.element, and sage.categories.pushout. I believe that a text using stuff from at least 6 modules would not fit to the idea of a reference manual. Therefore: Why not have a new thematic tutorial called "How to implement basic algebraic structures in Sage", with sub-sections on base classes, categories and coercion? It would of course be related with various modules of Sage, and there should be pointers from each of these modules to the new thematic tutorial -- so that it would be easy to find. Is that what you would call a one-step place? Cheers, Simon -- To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
