On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:19:41PM +0200, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Not my job.
Nor mine in the case of coercion and the _..._ methods :-) Because I
already spent a lot of time on some pieces of the Sage infrastructure
does not mean I (or anybody on sage-combinat-devel) am responsible for
all of it. Which is why I suggested to report and make your case on
sage-devel.
> No, the "one" thing does not belong to CartesianProduct because it does
> not apply to everything. I was just wondering about
> category/cartesian_product and sets/cartesian_product. Those two A files
> seem to address all cartesian products of everything (and this everything
> is always a set, isn't it ?)
Indeed. Still, see my comment about the value of not making a special
case for those methods.
> The current Sage *IS* pre-10963. And I hope that you have
> summand_projection in mind for it is what I used in #16269.
Certainly.
> Thanks for your answers.
Your welcome.
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/d/optout.
