> > sage: SupersingularModule(11). > > > > Should this be legal? And should be implemented without actually > > creating > > the oject with *just* syntatic checking? What say folks? > > How on earth would one implement that? There's no guarantee that the
We need to think about how to implement this carefully. And currently I cannot *think* as I'm mechanically grading student finals :) Let's not thrash the idea because it is difficult to implement! First lets answer this Q: is there any value-addition to user-friendliness due to this feature? IMO ... yes! What say? > object being returned would be a SupersingularModule, and if it there > was such a guarantee, you wouldn't know what methods were attached to > the object. I presume actually computing the SupersingularModule is > expensive? Goes without saying ... only as the arguments get bigger :) Ifti. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
