Re: [Axiom-developer] Polynomials, abstract objects, provisos

[Martin Rubey]

Ralf Hemmecke <address@hidden> writes:

> [recursive vs. distributed polynomials]

> > I don't know how we should model "abstract polynomials", but I'm not even 
> > sure
> > whether we should have such a thing.
> 
> That would be possible, but suppose you want to do a Gröbner basis
> computation. Who is going to choose the most efficient data representation?

[...]

I have no idea what you are talking about, sorry. I was referring to Tim's (?)
idea that we could say something like:

p: Abstract POLY INT

i.e., not assign p a value,

and still do interesting things with it. And I doubt that this is something
within reach, as it is, in my opinion, rather orthogonal to the philosophy of
the current Axiom Algebra.

Something easier to grasp is probably:

z: Abstract Complex INT

and then be able to say 

w := conjugate z.

In other words: there would be no data representation as we are used to
currently.

Again, note that although I find this an interesting subject, I believe that it
is currently out of reach.

Martin