Hi Jeroen, On 2015-11-26, Jeroen Demeyer <jdeme...@cage.ugent.be> wrote: >> On 2015-11-23, Travis Scrimshaw <tsc...@ucdavis.edu> wrote: >>> However, I'm +1 for flatting things down to Element as it would probably >>> solve #15160 <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15160> and #15947 >>> <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15947>. >> >> See #18756 or #18758. I think these would solve it eventually. > > I don't really see how those tickets are related to getting rid of > classes like RingElement.
Perhaps I recall wrongly what I did in these tickets. Anyway, what I recall is this: - Implement the generic coercion framework in Element rather than in RingElement. - Make it possible to implement an action via parent methods of a category. - Preserve RingElement and friends for backwards compatibility and for applications for which few nanoseconds slowdown in multiplication matter. Best regards, Simon -- 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.
