#13282: Access to GRDB Fano polytopes
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Reporter: sjg10 | Owner: mhampton
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.3
Component: geometry | Resolution:
Keywords: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: Samuel Gonshaw | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Comment (by tomc):
Replying to [comment:1 novoselt]:
> 1. Why are there separate functions for different dimensions of the
same stuff? Why not have a single one that will take dimension as another
argument?
This is of course possible. But we certainly want to retain the function
PolytopeSmoothFano(n)
so that we can iterate over smooth Fano polytopes, regardless of
dimension. So your suggestion would mean that this function would take
two forms:
{{{
PolytopeSmoothFano(dim=3,id=n)
}}}
and:
{{{
PolytopeSmoothFano(id=m)
}}}
(Note that, for a given polytope, n and m are different here.) I think
the this option is clunkier, but if you prefer it then we could do that
instead.
> 2. I think it would actually make sense to package everything into a
factory class with an instance, say `grdb_Fano_polytopes`, and access like
`grdb_Fano_polytopes.terminal(dim, n)`. (See e.g. Volker's toric variety
library for how it can be done.) Sage is not matching Magma or any other
system in naming conventions, and I think that such an approach would be
more in line with current constructors of different objects.
I disagree. One of the things that I find difficult in Sage as it stands
is that you need to know (or guess) the names of object factories before
you can find the object-construction functions using TAB completion.
Hanging all of these functions off lattice_polytope seems logical; it is
certainly the first place that I would look for them.
I concur with the rest of your comments.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13282#comment:2>
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.
