On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 03:16:28PM -0600, David Roe wrote:
> Agreed: defining actions through * should be no problem. In fact, it will
> be easier than with ^, since many elements implement __pow__ directly
> rather than going through the coercion system.
Yup, I agree that * can be a convenient notation for actions.
That being said, * is already very overloaded, which can lead to
confusions. It's no accident that, when writing mathematics, people
often use a different operator (like . or ^) to denote actions and
only resort to * (or nothing) when there is no ambiguity in the given
context. I believe we want the same:
(1) Use by default explicit non ambiguous notations like g.act(x), or
even:
sage: action = ....
sage: action(g,x)
(2) Provide an easy way for the user to register g*x as shorthand for
the above when he thinks it's ok in his/her context.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
