On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Nick Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Proposal B (from William's summary on the previous thread): >> >> Leave matrix() as-is. Rename echelon_form to hermite_form, and make a >> new echelon_form function that computes hermite_form over the fraction >> field of the base ring. > > I support this. I never want Sage to coerce my data away from the > initial object in the appropriate category (did I use those words > right, droe?) unless it absolutely has to. > > If you go with the other option, I will be forced to write an awful > lot of matrix(L[0].parent(), width, height, L) calls -- and that > sucks the hardest rocks of any Sage construct ever. > > Nick
Nick, do you honestly actually use the matrix(...) command in your code all the time without explicitly giving the base ring? In Magma there is no such matrix construction, by the way. The matrix function exists from the start *primarily* to make it really easy for everyday less algebraic users to make matrices. - William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
