#8881: Functorial constructions in categories
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Reporter: hivert | Owner: nthiery
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: critical | Milestone: sage-4.4.3
Component: categories | Keywords: Functorial constructions
Author: Nicolas M. Thiéry | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: Florent Hivert | Merged:
Work_issues: |
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Comment(by nthiery):
Replying to [comment:3 hivert]:
> One last remark, otherwise I'm ready to give positive review: there is a
slight naming inconsistency:
> - {{{CartesianProductFunctor, CartesianProducts,
CartesianProductsCategory, cartesian_product}}}
> - {{{TensorFunctor, TensorProducts, TensorProductsCategory, tensor}}}
>
> I'm just not 100% sure that we don't want {{{TensorProductFunctor}}} and
{{{tensor_product}}}...
>
> Any arguments ?
Yup, we had discussed this with David Roe during the review of the
category patches. And we had agreed that {{{tensor([A,B,C])}}} was
shorter and more practical than {{{tensor_product([A,B,C])}}}, yet
clear and unambiguous. On the other hand {{{cartesian([A,B,C])}}}
wasn't that clear. So we decided to favor here practicality over
consistency.
On the other hand, I fixed TensorFunctor to TensorProductFunctor in
the updated patch.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8881#comment:4>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
