#16134: modular forms for Hecke triangle groups
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: jj | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-
Component: modular forms | feature
Keywords: modular forms Hecke triangle | Resolution:
groups | Merged in:
Authors: | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Description changed by jj:
Old description:
> An attempt to implement modular forms for Hecke triangle groups.
>
> The current implementation and further details can be found at:
>
> https://github.com/jjermann/hecke_mf
>
> This is a prelimenary ticket.
> There is no branch yet and there are still obvious things missing:
>
> - This is my first contribution to sage, so I'm not familiar yet with
> all aspects/conventions. E.g. some function/class names should probably
> be changed.
>
> - I used an unfinnished/stub implementation for the Hecke triangle group.
> This is probably not a big issue since it is mostly used as a simple
> container for data anyway.
>
> - I already added doctests for the two core files "abstract_ring.py"
> and "graded_ring_element.py". But the remaining files still lack
> doctests.
>
> - Some mathematical definitions might be problematic resp. require
> rewording.
>
> - I ran into some issues with sage components which forced me to
> use "less elegant" solutions (that still "work" though).
> Especially with the pushout construction of sage,
> I think there are some problems with it.
>
> - ... "Other issues"
>
> The aim of this ticket is mainly to get some general feedback
> before I continue working on it:
>
> - Is the general design ok/acceptable?
>
> - What parts are ok and what parts should I (try to) change (and how)?
>
> - Suggestions? Requests?
>
> - If it is generally fine: Should I already create a branch?
> Is "sage/modular/hecke_mf" a good place?
New description:
An implementation of modular forms for Hecke triangle groups.
The current version and further details can be found at:
https://github.com/jjermann/hecke_mf
There is no branch yet and there are still some things missing:
- This is my first contribution to sage, so I'm not familiar yet with
all aspects/conventions. E.g. some function/class names should probably
be changed.
- I used an unfinnished/stub implementation for the Hecke triangle group.
This is probably not a big issue since it is mostly used as a simple
container for data anyway.
- Some mathematical definitions might be problematic resp. require
rewording.
E.g. the notation/definition of (holomorphic) "quasi modular forms"
- I ran into some issues with sage components which forced me to
use "less elegant" solutions (that still "work" though).
Especially with the pushout construction of sage,
I think there are some problems with it.
I hope to get some general feedback:
- What parts are ok and what parts should I (try to) change (and how)?
- Suggestions? Requests?
- Should I already create a branch? Is "sage/modular/hecke_mf" a good
spot?
--
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16134#comment:1>
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/d/optout.
