#18529: Topological manifolds: basics
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  egourgoulhon       |        Owner:  egourgoulhon
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_review
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.10
      Component:  geometry           |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  topological        |    Merged in:
  manifolds                          |    Reviewers:
        Authors:  Eric Gourgoulhon   |  Work issues:
Report Upstream:  N/A                |       Commit:
         Branch:                     |  f342e03e7008831c4789b94b03674c1a0cbbf3a6
  public/manifolds/top_manif_basics  |     Stopgaps:
   Dependencies:  #18175             |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by egourgoulhon):

 I've already noticed some important loss of performance due to the
 equality not being by id; I am afraid that for tensor computations this
 will become much worse. Moreover, a sophisticated equality check (either
 with `__eq__` or `is_isomorphic_to`) seems difficult to acheive: checking
 the equality of the user-defined atlases is definitevely not sufficient to
 assert the mathematical equality of two manifolds; one should compare the
 maximal atlases instead, which is impossible. For example, if one first
 construct S^2^ with an atlas of two stereographic charts and then another
 S^2^ with an atlas of two polar charts, the two atlases differ, while both
 objects represent the same manifold.

 For the above reasons, I am considering to revert to the
 `UniqueRepresentation` for manifolds. To solve the issue of the
 redefinition by the end user disccused in comment:32, we could have some
 handling of the cache in the function `Manifold`, so that
 {{{
   M1 = Manifold(2, 'M')
   M2 = Manifold(2, 'M')
 }}}
 will construct two different objects. What do you think?

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18529#comment:40>
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.

Reply via email to