There is also an example of this inheritance and discussion in one of the
sage.structure.unique_representation examples.
Best,
Travis
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 10:57:52 AM UTC+10, Travis Scrimshaw wrote:
>
>
> The prototype does, now I have to implement the real thing.
>>>
>>> Is there
> The prototype does, now I have to implement the real thing.
>>
>> Is there any way to add this info to the documentation? It took me a lot
>> of
>> trial and error to figure out how to do what I wanted.
>> S.
>>
>> Definitely. The topical place would be in sage.misc.classcall_metaclass,
>
On Thursday, September 26, 2019 at 3:14:07 PM UTC-7, Salvatore Stella wrote:
>
> The prototype does, now I have to implement the real thing.
>
> Is there any way to add this info to the documentation? It took me a lot
> of
> trial and error to figure out how to do what I wanted.
> S.
>
> Defin
The prototype does, now I have to implement the real thing.
Is there any way to add this info to the documentation? It took me a lot of
trial and error to figure out how to do what I wanted.
S.
* Travis Scrimshaw [2019-09-26 15:11:07]:
So it works now, correct?
Best,
Travis
On Friday, S
So it works now, correct?
Best,
Travis
On Friday, September 27, 2019 at 12:42:23 AM UTC+10, Salvatore Stella wrote:
>
> Oops, I think that I figured out where the mistake was. Here is the
> correct
> code:
>
> class OldFoo(UniqueRepresentation):
>
> @staticmethod
> def __classcall__
Oops, I think that I figured out where the mistake was. Here is the correct
code:
class OldFoo(UniqueRepresentation):
@staticmethod
def __classcall__(self, data, **kwargs):
hashable_data = tuple(data)
kwargs['some_default_option'] = 'bar'
return super(OldFoo, self).__
Hi all,
if you are a SageMath developer or user and based at a university or
institution in the UK we are interested in hearing from you. Especially if
you are interested in joining a group of us trying to get EPSRC funding for
Sage-related activities.
Together with Chris Wutrich and some oth
Thank you Travis for your reply. Here is an attempt at implementing your
suggestion that does not work: it looks like OldFoo.__classcall__ is skipped
and OldFoo.__init__ is run directly instead. This is not what I want: I would
like the preparsing in OldFoo to still be performed after the prepar
