#16134: modular forms for Hecke triangle groups
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jj | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: modular forms | Resolution:
Keywords: modular forms | Merged in:
Hecke triangle groups | Reviewers:
Authors: jj | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: u/jj/hecke_mf | eb9376a64478ce03d0332bf39ac4923310901afe
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by {'newvalue': u'jj', 'oldvalue': ''}):
* commit: => eb9376a64478ce03d0332bf39ac4923310901afe
* milestone: sage-feature => sage-6.3
* branch: => u/jj/hecke_mf
* author: => jj
Old 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?
New description:
An implementation of modular forms for Hecke triangle groups.
See the README file for more details.
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 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.
--
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16134#comment:2>
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.
