On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 03:50:59AM -0700, Volker Braun wrote:
> The question wasn't whether it is unambiguous for the computer, but why
> it is ambiguously displayed to the user.
I know. I just wanted to make sure nobody would worry about it.
> If axioms were internally represented by some object then it would be
> trivial to add the English language adjective for the _repr_ output.
I am not too worried about the implementation of the heuristic, but
about the heuristic itself: describe to me, in a generic way, what
output you'd want to have for a category of magmas and additive magmas
that satisfy a bunch of axioms. We could of course clear all ambiguity
by adding a bunch of parenthesis, but that would not help readability.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
