#10963: More functorial constructions
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nthiery | Owner: stumpc5
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.1
Component: categories | Resolution:
Keywords: days54 | Merged in:
Authors: Nicolas M. Thiéry | Reviewers: Simon King, Frédéric
Report Upstream: N/A | Chapoton
Branch: | Work issues: Detect and fix
public/ticket/10963 | Heisenbugs
Dependencies: #11224, #8327, | Commit:
#10193, #12895, #14516, #14722, | 5ccf253b17c151d8e773037ac634a64f84f03075
#13589, #14471, #15069, #15094, | Stopgaps:
#11688, #13394, #15150, #15506 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nbruin):
A cheap way out is simply removing the assert statement. I haven't seen
excessive recursion without it. However, since this code is infrastructure
for all of sage, it would be good to know exactly what the bad condition
is that happens with the assert and why avoiding the assert is enough to
avoid the bad scenarios.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10963#comment:249>
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.
