-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 489
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement call method for elements in CDGA's #36329
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While I am not 100% sure we should force the user to pass in every value, it is consistent with the multivariate polynomial ring.
I would also avoid code duplication for dict
input and keyword input and just combine the two and go from there.
Having things made explicit in the doc about mixing input types and the expected behavior could be useful later on.
elif values: | ||
raise ValueError("number of arguments does not match number of variables in parent") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
By this point, you have not used/parsed the keywords. So if someone passes in a mixture, then this might give a false result. In general, you probably should at least document the behavior and what you expect to have happen.
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
This is in some sense unavoidable, since in the case of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I probably would just make every dict
comparison done by strings, but okay, let it be so once a few other very minor changes are done.
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Co-authored-by: Travis Scrimshaw <clfrngrown@aol.com>
Thank you. If you could just squash the (reviewer changes) commits, then it will be a positive review. |
done! |
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit 320f177; changes) is ready! 🎉 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you.
Fixes #36328 by implementing the method.