#10140: Base sage.geometry.cone on the Parma Polyhedra Library (PPL)
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Reporter: vbraun | Owner: mhampton
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-feature
Component: geometry | Keywords: ppl
Author: Volker Braun | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Comment(by novoselt):
1. My concern was that it removes publicly exposed feature that has been
in Sage for several months (and is likely to stay there a few months
more). So I vote for resurrecting this possibility, which is actually very
easy when things are PPL based - you just replace `Polyhedron` with
`Polyhedron.rays()`, as you said. More importantly, if PPL will become
something that users have to install separately, then ALL of the old code
related to polyhedron -> cone should remain untouched, but there should be
some new path to go around it. By the way, I am not quite familiar with
packages - is it possible to change Sage library during package
installation? If not and all PPL-related code should be in the library no
matter whether PPL is installed or not, then "doctest-fixing" may be a bad
approach here. Maybe we should change doctests to make them deterministic.
Although I am not quite sure how.
2. I see your point, but having non-documented input rubs me the wrong
way. If you don't want to mention PPL in the documentation (which is quite
reasonable), maybe we can add a function like `_Cone_from_PPL` for such
input? For the actual class there is no need in this - it is already not
supposed to be called directly by users.
3. Yes, that's what I had in mind. My concern is that when you use PPL
representation, you may need to actually change it somehow to get the
result. So far in your code you were constructing a new object based on
existing one, so that the original is intact, but it seems to me that this
step is quite easy to forget and it would be nice to have something
forcing you to do so.
7. That explains it ;-)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10140#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.
