#11943: The category graph should comply with Python's method resolution order
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: nthiery
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.8
Component: categories | Keywords: category graph, method resolution
order
Work_issues: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Author: Simon King
Merged: | Dependencies: #11900
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Changes (by SimonKing):
* status: needs_work => needs_review
* work_issues: Remove the base method for cartesian_product (now
unneeded) or reduce it to base_ring. =>
Comment:
I have replaced the `base()` method of Cartesian products by a
`base_ring()` method. I think it holds true that if some category has a
base ring then all cartesian products of its objects have the same base
ring. This may be not so sure when doing the same with a general bases.
I did not run full doctests yet, but the original example that made me
introduce the `base()` method in #11900 is still working:
{{{
sage: P.<x,y,z> = QQ[]
sage: P in Algebras(QQ)
True
sage: P.category()
Join of Category of unique factorization domains and Category of
commutative algebras over Rational Field
}}}
Benchmark, for avoiding to return to the old regression:
{{{
sage: %time L = EllipticCurve('960d1').prove_BSD()
CPU times: user 3.78 s, sys: 0.08 s, total: 3.86 s
Wall time: 4.10 s
}}}
#11935 will make this even faster.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11943#comment:45>
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.
