#10963: More functorial constructions
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: nthiery | Owner: stumpc5
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
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:
public/ticket/10963 | Commit:
Dependencies: #11224, #8327, | 8045aa4a4b7ada735b3eb6055382f9b341a39f1e
#10193, #12895, #14516, #14722, | Stopgaps:
#13589, #14471, #15069, #15094, |
#11688, #13394, #15150, #15506 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nthiery):
Replying to [comment:374 ncohen]:
> In the same page, there is a broken link, in "Each category should come
with a good example, in sage.categories.examples".
Thanks for the reminder. I was wondering about this. At this point, the
module sage.categories.examples bears no documentation (like most modules
corresponding to directories in Sage). In such a case is it better to not
put a link, or put one in case someone would later add documentation?
Well, ok, or add doc there, but I am not sure what would be useful to say.
> If you want to avoid that, you can use the `--warn-links` flag when
compiling the doc. Broken links will appear as warnings, it's totally
cool.
Yup; I'll run that. I just don't promise I'll fix here those links that
were previously broken.
> Besides, it seems very easy to intersect properties (axioms). Isn't
there any need to *remove* axioms from time to time ? And is there a way
to do it ?
You have the _without_axiom method. It works stupidly by removing all
axioms and then reinserting all but the one you mentionned. It's not super
robust though, since some combinations of axioms may imply others and thus
you might get back the original category as in:
{{{
sage: F = FiniteFields()
sage: F._without_axiom("Commutative")
Category of finite fields
}}}
Since I had only very little use cases for this method, I left it as
private for now until one will get a clearer idea of the precise semantic
we want.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10963#comment:377>
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.
