#9138: Categories for all rings
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  jbandlow    |          Owner:  nthiery                            
       Type:  defect      |         Status:  needs_review                       
   Priority:  major       |      Milestone:  sage-4.7                           
  Component:  categories  |       Keywords:  introspection, categories for rings
Work_issues:              |       Upstream:  N/A                                
   Reviewer:              |         Author:  Simon King                         
     Merged:              |   Dependencies:                                     
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------

Comment(by nthiery):

 Replying to [comment:52 SimonKing]:
 > The first patch did not cover all rings - it turned out that many
 classes derived from sage.rings.ring.Ring do in fact ''not'' call the
 `__init__`  method of rings. Hence, in these cases, the category stuff was
 not present.
 >
 > The second patch takes care of some of these cases - I think I shouldn't
 vouch for completeness, though. Moreover, I implemented the new coercion
 model for some more classes of rings, such as free algebras, quotient
 rings, and boolean polynomial rings.

 Cool!

 > Concerning quotient rings: I hope that the category of this quotient
 ring is correctly chosen:
 > {{{
 > sage: P.<x,y> = QQ[]
 > sage: Q = P.quo(P*[x^2+y^2])
 > sage: Q.category()
 > Join of Category of commutative rings and Category of subquotients of
 monoids and Category of quotients of semigroups
 > }}}
 >
 > What do you think: Should it perhaps better be "join of Category of
 commutative algebras over Rational Field and Category of subquotients
 ..."?
 > After all, P belongs to the category of commutative algebras over the
 rational field.

 If multiplication by elements of QQ are implemented (and I assume they
 are), then yes I definitely would go for commutative algebras.

 > But apart from that, it seems ready for review now.

 Nice! I'll work on that in the coming weeks, but can't promise when
 with the upcoming Sage days. Please anyone beat me to it!

 Cheers,
                                         Nicolas

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9138#comment:53>
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.

Reply via email to