Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improvements to Sets.WithRealizations #12959

Closed
nthiery opened this issue May 17, 2012 · 14 comments
Closed

Improvements to Sets.WithRealizations #12959

nthiery opened this issue May 17, 2012 · 14 comments

Comments

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor

nthiery commented May 17, 2012

This is a follow up to #7980

Apply:

Depends on #12953

CC: @sagetrac-sage-combinat @sagetrac-chrisjamesberg @zabrocki

Component: categories

Keywords: realizations, sd40

Author: Nicolas M. Thiéry, Franco Saliola

Reviewer: Mike Zabrocki

Merged: sage-5.3.beta0

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12959

@nthiery nthiery added this to the sage-5.3 milestone May 17, 2012
@nthiery nthiery self-assigned this May 17, 2012
@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 15, 2012

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 15, 2012

Changed keywords from realizations to realizations, sd40

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 15, 2012

Changed author from Nicolas M. Thiéry, ... to Nicolas M. Thiéry, Franco Saliola

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 15, 2012

comment:1

Implement default methods for (With)Realizations that use the realization provided by the method a_realization for computations:

  • AlgebrasWithBasis.ParentMethods.product is modified to use
    product_by_coercion if product_on_basis is not available
  • Magmas.Realizations added and
    Magmas.Realizations.ParentMethods.product_by_coercion uses
    self.a_realization()
  • CommutativeAdditiveMonoids.WithRealizations added and
    CommutativeAdditiveMonoids.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.zero
    returns self.a_realization().zero()
  • Monoids.WithRealizations added and Monoids.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.one
    returns self.a_realization().one()
  • Sets.WithRealizations.ParentMethods.inject_shorthands : injects any
    shorthands names for realizations provided in the _shorthands attribute
  • added _shorthand attribute to the example in
    sage.categories.example.with_realizations

And update examples/with_realizations.py accordingly.

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 15, 2012

Attachment: trac_12959-doctest_fix-fs.patch.gz

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 23, 2012

Attachment: trac_12959-100_percent_coverage_for_algebras_with_basis-fs.patch.gz

100% doctest coverage for algebras_with_basis

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 23, 2012

comment:3

Mike pointed out that algebras_with_basis.py needed only 1 doctest to get 100% coverage, so this latest patch adds one.

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 25, 2012

comment:4

Attachment: trac_12959-remove_lower_from_realization_name-fs.patch.gz

Latest patch switches to using the class name for determining the default realization name (currently, the class name is taken and it is rendered lowercase for some reason; there was a FIXME suggesting this should not be lowercased).

@jdemeyer
Copy link

comment:6

Please fill in your real name as Reviewer.

@saliola
Copy link

saliola commented Jul 27, 2012

Reviewer: Mike Zabrocki

@saliola

This comment has been minimized.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

jdemeyer commented Aug 1, 2012

Merged: sage-5.3.beta0

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor Author

nthiery commented Aug 3, 2012

comment:10

For the record: I imported the latest version of the patches in the Sage-Combinat queue, and rebased my functorial construction patch on top of it.

Cheers,

@nthiery
Copy link
Contributor Author

nthiery commented Aug 3, 2012

comment:11

Replying to @saliola:

Latest patch switches to using the class name for determining the default realization name (currently, the class name is taken and it is rendered lowercase for some reason; there was a FIXME suggesting this should not be lowercased).

There was a question mark at the end of the FIXME; so this was to be discussed! Oh well, since it's merged in, I guess we can just consider the discussion as closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants