#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, | eb7b486c6fecac296052f980788e15e2ad1b59e4
#10193, #12895, #14516, #14722, | Stopgaps:
#13589, #14471, #15069, #15094, |
#11688, #13394, #15150, #15506 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
> I said that it only seemed unnecessary to me ''at first''! And after
all, the necessity to choose a spanning tree makes it fairly obvious that
one has to make choices at some point.
Perhaps I understand nothing of what is happening here -- and I am quite
prepared to hear it -- but in my own pagan way of doing things, and as you
seem to be associating functions to set of axioms, I wondered why you
don't associate functions to ... sets of axioms ?
It looks like your problem is that the user should "decide" if the
function is a function of `A.B` or a function of `B.A` when what you have
in mind is a function of `{A,B}`. Why don't you have a syntax which takes
as information a set of axioms (and a category if needed), and let some
code decide automatically where it should be put (pick your spanning tree)
?
Something like the fancy stuff you like, a metaclass which creates a class
from its SET of axioms, and everything ? This class would not appear as a
subclass of any categoy with axiom, it would just stand on its own
somewhere, and be copied where it belongs, by some code the coder does not
have to think about ?
Nathann
P.S. : A "spanning tree" in a dag is usually not called a spanning tree
but a spanning out-arborescence. We just don't like "trees" to be directed
`:-P`
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10963#comment:461>
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.
