#10668: Refactor category support for morphisms (Hom is not a functorial
construction!)
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: nthiery | Owner: nthiery
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: categories | Keywords:
Author: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment(by nthiery):
> But what would actually prevent us from doing ''both''?
Ah, good, we now fund the point were we did not understand each
other. The plan is definitely to do both! That is have inheritance
from Cat.morphism_class and Cat.hom_category().element_class.
> OK, this is what I suggested above: One needs to introduce a
> standard mechanism to declare the category which
> `Cat.hom_category()` is sub-category of.
And that's a second misunderstanding: this mechanism already exists,
and I am not planning to remove it (though the syntax might change a
tiny bit; we probably don't need the extra_super_categories thingy,
and just use super_categories.
What do you think of using the occasion to rename Cat.hom_category()
into Cat.Homsets(), for consistency with Cat.Quotients() and the like?
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10668#comment:9>
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.
