#10963: More functorial constructions
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  nthiery            |        Owner:  stumpc5
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_work
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-5.13
      Component:  categories         |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  days54             |    Merged in:
        Authors:  Nicolas M. Thiéry  |    Reviewers:  Simon King, Frédéric
Report Upstream:  N/A                |  Chapoton
         Branch:                     |  Work issues:
  public/ticket/10963                |       Commit:
   Dependencies:  #11224, #8327,     |  a410d05b692eead348214b0378dfc78113a3bf5a
  #10193, #12895, #14516, #14722,    |     Stopgaps:
  #13589, #14471, #15069, #15094,    |
  #11688, #13394                     |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by nthiery):

 Replying to [comment:177 darij]:
 > Pushed a couple trivial (hopefully...) changes -- someone please check!

 I checked them, and I am happy with them in principle. Thanks for the
 proofreading! However this ticket is more or less in frozen state, and
 still officially to be merged on the mercurial side (the git branch is
 just to allow for development of tickets depending on this one on the
 git side). In fact, I consider this ticket as positive review modulo
 the dependency on this memory deallocation bug.

 So I'd rather postpone those changes to a later ticket
 instead of spending time backporting them to mercurial.

 > Also I've confirmed that the version of #13394 in the patch equals the
 one in the master, so there was no error in that.

 Ok

 > Also, am I seeing it right that the category of group algebras is
 > now no longer a subcategory of Hopf algebras, and the category of
 > monoid algebras no longer one of that of bialgebras? Or were they
 > never? EDIT: Yeah, they never were. I guess they should be, at least
 > once bialgebras and Hopf algebras get any useful methods like
 > integrals?

 Group algebras are still Hopf algebras as they used to be. Making
 monoid algebras into bialgebras is certainly a desirable feature, in a
 later ticket.

 Cheers,
                                        Nicolas

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10963#comment:178>
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