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
[Merged by Bors] - feat(analysis/normed_space/enorm): define extended norm #2897
Conversation
I have a design question here. When one does analysis with, say, Think for instance of the case where you speak of continuous functions on So, I am wondering if in the definition of Both options have pros and cons, so I just want to be sure that you have considered both of them before opting for one. (Avoiding quotients as you do is probably a good idea, in fact). It would be worth mentioning this in the docstring, too. |
No, I missed this point.
Another approach: define |
I would say: for now, let's only define enorms as in your file. Maybe this will be sufficient, together with a coercion from functions to almost everywhere defined functions, and otherwise we will see what we need when we need it. |
bors r+ |
Co-authored-by: sgouezel <sebastien.gouezel@univ-rennes1.fr>
Pull request successfully merged into master. Build succeeded: |
…ommunity#2897) Co-authored-by: sgouezel <sebastien.gouezel@univ-rennes1.fr>
No description provided.