On Sunday, March 3, 2013 7:57:11 PM UTC+1, Ben Hutz wrote: > > As some of you are aware the (arithmetic) dynamical systems community has > been working on dynamical system functionality for Sage. As the initial > ticket has been reviewed (#13130) I've opened tickets for the remaining > (completed) functionality: > 14217<http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14217>, > 14218 <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14218>, > 14219<http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14219> > . > > I've opened the three tickets at once and up-loaded the patches even > though they are not quite ready for review to make the case for splitting > morphism.py into several files. The reason is that morphism.py is getting > crowded. With just 13130 it is still a nice compact file, but it seems like > it is getting overloaded with (14127,14218,14219), especially since there > remains quite a bit of dynamics functionality that has been published > recently, but not implemented as patches (beyond these 3 tickets). I know > that some history is lost as code when moved around, but I propose doing > the split now (as part of #14217) before more dynamics functionality is > added to morphism.py. This would also leave morphism.py as a more generic > file without the dynamics specific functionality it in. > > If this is reasonable, I'd like some input on where to move these files. > > The maximum change would be an "affine_space" and a "projective_space" > folder in sage\schemes\ each with point and polynomial morphism files for > rings/field/finite_fields (so a total of 12 new files and 2 folders) and > some rearrangement of where the affine/projective functionality lives (it > in currently in schemes/generic). > Not sure it is related, but finite field lattices may be finally merged in #8335. It would be great if the two changesets were not completely conflicting.
> > The minimum I propose would be making 4 new files in schemes/generic one > each for affine/projective points/morphisms. > > I think the major division makes sense as there are plans for a > significant amount of dynamics functionality. But, as this proposal is > more than just implementing a couple functions, I am seeking the > input/experience of sage-devel. > > I look forward to your input. > > Sincerely, > Ben Hutz > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
