"Nicolas M. Thiery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Very much like in MuPAD. And somehow that's the part I don't like in > MuPAD. We often wanted to have parents which would simultaneously be > also elements (e.g. consider a monoid whose elements would themselves > be monoids, using cartesian product as multiplication). Being forced > to put parents of parent-element at a different level makes it harder > to share code (here, between 1st level and 2nd level monoids). And > what about monoids of monoids of monoids?
You know that FriCAS/Aldor does not have this drawback? Eg., the set of all combinatorial species forms a Ring... Martin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
