#19259: subrings of the symbolic ring
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: dkrenn | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.9
Component: symbolics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Daniel Krenn | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: u/dkrenn | Commit:
/symbolic-subring | 7938d95efbba4282216166d9ba200e1552a9b21f
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by dkrenn):
Replying to [comment:6 novoselt]:
> This is fantastic!
Good to hear :)
> Don't plan to review it as I am not an expert on coersion stuff, but
looks very good.
You could review the non-coercion part ;)
> I am only not quite sure that `only_constants` deserves to be a
parameter: it can be implemented by accepting no variables and if
`SR.subring(accepting_variables=())` looks bad and non-obvious, than
perhaps there should be a shortcut for it `SR.subring_of_constants()`?
My feeling is that some kind of shortcut to this special ring is
convenient to have (and it is also good to mention this subring explicitly
somewhere). Thus, `+1` that there is some kind of explicit way to create
the subring of symbolic constants.
However, I am open on how this should be achieved. My indention was having
one method `subring` which can create all kind of subrings (cf. Unix
philosophy: Do One Thing and Do It Well).
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19259#comment:7>
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.
