Hi Simon, Thanks for your comments, but I don't think they work for me. See below.
On May 19, 3:50 pm, Simon King <simon.k...@nuigalway.ie> wrote: > Hi John! > > On 19 Mai, 23:25, John Palmieri <jhpalmier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Suppose I want to define a new algebra in Sage. What should I do? > > > - I have followed the nice coercion docs in the reference manual, and > > in particular, I've set up _add_, _mul_, etc.; and also > > _coerce_map_from_ and _element_constructor_. > > > - Should I do anything with the new categories framework? I've > > defined a "category" method for the algebra, but should I do anything > > else? > > In order to use the full machinery, you should define a "construction > functor" (assuming that your construction is functorial). Well, it's not functorial in a simple (that is, easily implemented) way. I'm working on the Lambda algebra, if that means anything to you. If not, think of it like the Steenrod algebra. For each prime p, there is a F_p algebra, and the ones from different primes don't map to each other. (It's not a construction you apply to rings or groups, just to finite prime fields.) So there's not much functoriality here. There is an action of this algebra on the mod p homology of any space, but that involves Steenrod operations on (co)homology, which haven't been implemented yet. It's on my list, but anyway, it doesn't give a functorial construction of these algebras. -- John -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
