#10963: More functorial constructions
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
       Reporter:         |         Owner:  stumpc5
  nthiery                |        Status:  needs_work
           Type:         |     Milestone:
  enhancement            |    Resolution:
       Priority:  major  |     Merged in:
      Component:         |     Reviewers:  Simon King
  categories             |   Work issues:  Reduce startup time by 5%. Avoid
       Keywords:         |  "recursion depth exceeded (ignored)". Trivial
        Authors:         |  doctest fixes.
  Nicolas M. ThiƩry      |  Dependencies:  #11224, #8327, #10193, #12895,
Report Upstream:  N/A    |  #14516, #14722, #13589
         Branch:         |
       Stopgaps:         |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment (by SimonKing):

 Replying to [comment:61 nthiery]:
 > Replying to [comment:57 SimonKing]:
 > > OK, that's a considerable change. In the "good" old times, a
 > > category C was (by definition) a sub-category of another category D,
 > > if and only if D was contained in `C.all_super_categories()`. So,
 > > you say this shall change (or already has?).
 >
 > This was already like this for join categories.

 You're right. But I think this has been the *only* exception.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10963#comment:66>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to