README: rewrite it, it was rather out-of-date

[sage.d.git] / mjo / eja / TODO

diff --git a/mjo/eja/TODO b/mjo/eja/TODO
index 98314cea72c13f0d58a54f2e16ad0067e740336b..b0d5378fab6ed7c7c981aaf0fd9a044ca18a1b07 100644 (file)
--- a/mjo/eja/TODO
+++ b/mjo/eja/TODO
@@ -1,23 +1,20 @@
-1. Add CartesianProductEJA.
+1. Add references and start citing them.
 
-2. Check the axioms in the constructor when check != False?
+2. Profile (and fix?) any remaining slow operations.
 
-3. Add references and start citing them.
+3. When we take a Cartesian product involving a trivial algebra, we
+   could easily cache the identity and charpoly coefficients using
+   the nontrivial factor. On the other hand, it's nice that we can
+   test out some alternate code paths...
 
-4. Implement the octonion simple EJA.
+4. Add dimension bounds on any tests over AA that compute element
+   subalgebras.
 
-5. Factor out the unit-norm basis (and operator symmetry) tests once
-   all of the algebras pass.
+5. The rational_algebra() stuff doesn't really belong in classes that
+   don't derive from RationalBasisEJA or its as-yet-nonexistent
+   element class.
 
-6. Implement spectral projector decomposition for EJA operators
-   using jordan_form() or eigenmatrix_right(). I suppose we can
-   ignore the problem of base rings for now and just let it crash
-   if we're not using AA as our base field.
-
-7. Do we really need to orthonormalize the basis in a subalgebra?
-   So long as we can decompose the operator (which is invariant
-   under changes of basis), who cares?
-
-8. Ensure that we can construct all algebras over both AA and RR.
-
-9. Check that our field is a subring of RLF.
+6. Add special det/trace method overrides for the algebras where we
+   know them? The only reason this might be tricky is because the
+   obvious solution is to subclass EJAElement, but then we might
+   collide with e.g. the Cartesian product element subclass.