#15801: Categories over a base ring category
---------------------------+----------------------------
   Reporter:  nthiery      |            Owner:
       Type:  enhancement  |           Status:  new
   Priority:  major        |        Milestone:  sage-6.2
  Component:  categories   |         Keywords:
  Merged in:               |          Authors:
  Reviewers:               |  Report Upstream:  N/A
Work issues:               |           Branch:
     Commit:               |     Dependencies:
   Stopgaps:               |
---------------------------+----------------------------
 Currently, to construct a category of algebras, we need to specify the
 base ring:
 {{{
     sage: Algebras(QQ)
 }}}

 A side effect is that the construction of e.g. {{{GF(p)['x']}}} for a
 lot of `p`'s in number theoretic calculations triggers the
 construction of many parallel hierarchies of categories.

 This is a waste because in most situations only the category of the
 base ring is relevant. In particular, the generic code provided to
 parents/elements/... only depends on the latter.

 The purpose of this ticket is to allow for only specifying the
 category of the base ring, as in:
 {{{
     sage: Algebras(Fields())
 }}}
 with
 {{{
     sage: Algebras(QQ)
 }}}
 constructing a subcategory of the former. Then go trough the code,
 decide in each case whether we want to use {{{Algebras(QQ)}} or
 {{{Algebras(Fields())}}}, and update the doctests accordingly. In most
 case, the latter idiom will be preferable, unless we need some
 operation on the category itself.

 This would fix the regression noted on #15792 and made worse by
 #10963.

 Further features for this ticket or follow-up tickets would be to:

 - make {{{Modules(...)}}} into a covariant functorial
   constructions. This would give a proper framework for the feature
   {{{Modules(QQ)}}} -> {{{VectorSpaces(QQ)}}} instead of having to
   tackle it with a special hack.

 - implement a {{{PolynomialRings(...)}}}  covariant functorial
   construction.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15801>
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