"""
Axioms

This documentation covers how to implement axioms and proceeds with an
overview of the implementation of the axiom infrastructure. It assumes
that the reader is familiar with the :ref:`category primer
<sage.categories.primer>`, and in particular its :ref:`section about
axioms <category-primer-axioms>`.

Implementing axioms
===================

Simple case involving a single predefined axiom
-----------------------------------------------

Suppose that one wants to provide code (and documentation, tests, ...)
for the objects of some existing category ``Cs()`` that satisfy some
predefined axiom ``A``.

The first step is to open the hood and check whether there already
exists a class implementing the category ``Cs().A()``. For example,
taking ``Cs=Semigroups`` and the ``Finite`` axiom, there already
exists a class for the category of finite semigroups::

    sage: Semigroups().Finite()
    Category of finite semigroups
    sage: type(Semigroups().Finite())
    <class 'sage.categories.finite_semigroups.FiniteSemigroups_with_category'>

In this case, we say that the category of semigroups *implements* the
axiom ``Finite``, and code about finite semigroups should go in the
class :class:`FiniteSemigroups` (or, as usual, in its nested classes
``ParentMethods``, ``ElementMethods``, and so on).

On the other hand, there is no class for the category of infinite
semigroups::

    sage: Semigroups().Infinite()
    Category of infinite semigroups
    sage: type(Semigroups().Infinite())
    <class 'sage.categories.category.JoinCategory_with_category'>

This category is indeed just constructed as the intersection of the
categories of semigroups and of infinite sets respectively::

    sage: Semigroups().Infinite().super_categories()
    [Category of semigroups, Category of infinite sets]

In this case, one needs to create a new class to implement the axiom
``Infinite`` for this category. This boils down to adding a nested
class ``Semigroups.Infinite`` inheriting from :class:`CategoryWithAxiom`.

In the following example, we implement a category ``Cs``, with a
subcategory for the objects satisfying the ``Finite`` axiom defined in
the super category ``Sets`` (we will see later on how to *define* new
axioms)::

    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
    sage: class Cs(Category):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [Sets()]
    ....:     class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         class ParentMethods:
    ....:             def foo(self):
    ....:                 print("I am a method on finite C's")

::

    sage: Cs().Finite()
    Category of finite cs
    sage: Cs().Finite().super_categories()
    [Category of finite sets, Category of cs]
    sage: Cs().Finite().all_super_categories()
    [Category of finite cs, Category of finite sets,
     Category of cs, Category of sets, ...]
    sage: Cs().Finite().axioms()
    frozenset({'Finite'})

Now a parent declared in the category ``Cs().Finite()`` inherits from
all the methods of finite sets and of finite `C`'s, as desired::

    sage: P = Parent(category=Cs().Finite())
    sage: P.is_finite()             # Provided by Sets.Finite.ParentMethods
    True
    sage: P.foo()                   # Provided by Cs.Finite.ParentMethods
    I am a method on finite C's

.. _category-with-axiom-design:

.. NOTE::

    - This follows the same idiom as for
      :ref:`sage.categories.covariant_functorial_construction`.

    - From an object oriented point of view, any subcategory ``Cs()``
      of :class:`Sets` inherits a ``Finite`` method.  Usually ``Cs``
      could complement this method by overriding it with a method
      ``Cs.Finite`` which would make a super call to ``Sets.Finite``
      and then do extra stuff.

      In the above example, ``Cs`` also wants to complement
      ``Sets.Finite``, though not by doing more stuff, but by
      providing it with an additional mixin class containing the code
      for finite ``Cs``. To keep the analogy, this mixin class is to
      be put in ``Cs.Finite``.

    - By defining the axiom ``Finite``, :class:`Sets` fixes the
      semantic of ``Cs.Finite()`` for all its subcategories ``Cs``:
      namely "the category of ``Cs`` which are finite as sets". Hence,
      for example, ``Modules.Free.Finite`` cannot be used to model the
      category of free modules of finite rank, even though their
      traditional name "finite free modules" might suggest it.

    - It may come as a surprise that we can actually use the same name
      ``Finite`` for the mixin class and for the method defining the
      axiom; indeed, by default a class does not have a binding
      behavior and would completely override the method. See the
      section :ref:`axioms-defining-a-new-axiom` for details and the
      rationale behind it.

      An alternative would have been to give another name to the mixin
      class, like ``FiniteCategory``. However this would have resulted
      in more namespace pollution, whereas using ``Finite`` is already
      clear, explicit, and easier to remember.

    - Under the hood, the category ``Cs().Finite()`` is aware that it
      has been constructed from the category ``Cs()`` by adding the
      axiom ``Finite``::

        sage: Cs().Finite().base_category()
        Category of cs
        sage: Cs().Finite()._axiom
        'Finite'

Over time, the nested class ``Cs.Finite`` may become large and too
cumbersome to keep as a nested subclass of ``Cs``. Or the category with
axiom may have a name of its own in the literature, like *semigroups*
rather than *associative magmas*, or *fields* rather than *commutative
division rings*. In this case, the category with axiom can be put
elsewhere, typically in a separate file, with just a link from
``Cs``::

    sage: class Cs(Category):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [Sets()]
    sage: class FiniteCs(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:     class ParentMethods:
    ....:         def foo(self):
    ....:             print("I am a method on finite C's")
    sage: Cs.Finite = FiniteCs
    sage: Cs().Finite()
    Category of finite cs

For a real example, see the code of the class :class:`FiniteGroups` and the
link to it in :class:`Groups`. Note that the link is implemented using
:class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport`; this is highly recommended: it
makes sure that :class:`FiniteGroups` is imported after :class:`Groups` it
depends upon, and makes it explicit that the class :class:`Groups` can be
imported and is fully functional without importing :class:`FiniteGroups`.

.. NOTE::

    Some categories with axioms are created upon Sage's startup. In such a
    case, one needs to pass the ``at_startup=True`` option to
    :class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport`, in order to quiet the warning
    about that lazy import being resolved upon startup. See for example
    ``Sets.Finite``.

    This is undoubtedly a code smell. Nevertheless, it is preferable
    to stick to lazy imports, first to resolve the import order
    properly, and more importantly as a reminder that the category
    would be best not constructed upon Sage's startup. This is to spur
    developers to reduce the number of parents (and therefore
    categories) that are constructed upon startup. Each
    ``at_startup=True`` that will be removed will be a measure of
    progress in this direction.

.. NOTE::

    In principle, due to a limitation of
    :class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport` with nested classes (see
    :trac:`15648`), one should pass the option ``as_name`` to
    :class:`~sage.misc.lazy_import.LazyImport`::

        Finite = LazyImport('sage.categories.finite_groups', 'FiniteGroups', as_name='Finite')

    in order to prevent ``Groups.Finite`` to keep on reimporting
    ``FiniteGroups``.

    Given that passing this option introduces some redundancy and is
    error prone, the axiom infrastructure includes a little workaround
    which makes the ``as_name`` unnecessary in this case.

Making the category with axiom directly callable
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If desired, a category with axiom can be constructed directly through
its class rather than through its base category::

    sage: Semigroups()
    Category of semigroups
    sage: Semigroups() is Magmas().Associative()
    True

    sage: FiniteGroups()
    Category of finite groups
    sage: FiniteGroups() is Groups().Finite()
    True

For this notation to work, the class :class:`Semigroups` needs to be
aware of the base category class (here, :class:`Magmas`) and of the
axiom (here, ``Associative``)::

    sage: Semigroups._base_category_class_and_axiom
    (<class 'sage.categories.magmas.Magmas'>, 'Associative')
    sage: Fields._base_category_class_and_axiom
    (<class 'sage.categories.division_rings.DivisionRings'>, 'Commutative')
    sage: FiniteGroups._base_category_class_and_axiom
    (<class 'sage.categories.groups.Groups'>, 'Finite')
    sage: FiniteDimensionalAlgebrasWithBasis._base_category_class_and_axiom
    (<class 'sage.categories.algebras_with_basis.AlgebrasWithBasis'>, 'FiniteDimensional')

In our example, the attribute ``_base_category_class_and_axiom`` was
set upon calling ``Cs().Finite()``, which makes the notation seemingly
work::

    sage: FiniteCs()
    Category of finite cs
    sage: FiniteCs._base_category_class_and_axiom
    (<class '__main__.Cs'>, 'Finite')
    sage: FiniteCs._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
    'set by __classget__'

But calling ``FiniteCs()`` right after defining the class would have
failed (try it!). In general, one needs to set the attribute explicitly::

    sage: class FiniteCs(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:     _base_category_class_and_axiom = (Cs, 'Finite')
    ....:     class ParentMethods:
    ....:         def foo(self):
    ....:             print("I am a method on finite C's")

Having to set explicitly this link back from ``FiniteCs`` to ``Cs``
introduces redundancy in the code. It would therefore be desirable to
have the infrastructure set the link automatically instead (a
difficulty is to achieve this while supporting lazy imported
categories with axiom).

As a first step, the link is set automatically upon accessing the
class from the base category class::

    sage: Algebras.WithBasis._base_category_class_and_axiom
    (<class 'sage.categories.algebras.Algebras'>, 'WithBasis')
    sage: Algebras.WithBasis._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
    'set by __classget__'

Hence, for whatever this notation is worth, one can currently do::

    sage: Algebras.WithBasis(QQ)
    Category of algebras with basis over Rational Field

We don't recommend using syntax like ``Algebras.WithBasis(QQ)``, as it
may eventually be deprecated.

As a second step, Sage tries some obvious heuristics to deduce the link
from the name of the category with axiom (see
:func:`base_category_class_and_axiom` for the details). This typically
covers the following examples::

    sage: FiniteCoxeterGroups()
    Category of finite coxeter groups
    sage: FiniteCoxeterGroups() is CoxeterGroups().Finite()
    True
    sage: FiniteCoxeterGroups._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
    'deduced by base_category_class_and_axiom'

    sage: FiniteDimensionalAlgebrasWithBasis(QQ)
    Category of finite dimensional algebras with basis over Rational Field
    sage: FiniteDimensionalAlgebrasWithBasis(QQ) is Algebras(QQ).FiniteDimensional().WithBasis()
    True

If the heuristic succeeds, the result is guaranteed to be correct. If
it fails, typically because the category has a name of its own like
:class:`Fields`, the attribute ``_base_category_class_and_axiom``
should be set explicitly. For more examples, see the code of the
classes :class:`Semigroups` or :class:`Fields`.

.. NOTE::

    When printing out a category with axiom, the heuristic determines
    whether a category has a name of its own by checking out how
    ``_base_category_class_and_axiom`` was set::

        sage: Fields._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
        'hardcoded'

    See :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._without_axioms`,
    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static`.

In our running example ``FiniteCs``, Sage failed to deduce
automatically the base category class and axiom because the class
``Cs`` is not in the standard location ``sage.categories.cs``.

.. TOPIC:: Design discussion

    The above deduction, based on names, is undoubtedly inelegant. But
    it's safe (either the result is guaranteed to be correct, or an
    error is raised), it saves on some redundant information, and it
    is only used for the simple shorthands like ``FiniteGroups()`` for
    ``Groups().Finite()``. Finally, most if not all of these
    shorthands are likely to eventually disappear (see :trac:`15741`
    and the :ref:`related discussion in the primer
    <category-primer-axioms-single-entry-point>`).

.. _axioms-defining-a-new-axiom:

Defining a new axiom
--------------------

We describe now how to define a new axiom. The first step is to figure
out the largest category where the axiom makes sense. For example
``Sets`` for ``Finite``, ``Magmas`` for ``Associative``, or
``Modules`` for ``FiniteDimensional``. Here we define the axiom
``Green`` for the category ``Cs`` and its subcategories::

    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
    sage: class Cs(Category):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [Sets()]
    ....:     class SubcategoryMethods:
    ....:         def Green(self):
    ....:             '<documentation of the axiom Green>'
    ....:             return self._with_axiom("Green")
    ....:     class Green(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         class ParentMethods:
    ....:             def foo(self):
    ....:                 print("I am a method on green C's")

With the current implementation, the name of the axiom must also be
added to a global container::

    sage: all_axioms = sage.categories.category_with_axiom.all_axioms
    sage: all_axioms += ("Green",)

We can now use the axiom as usual::

    sage: Cs().Green()
    Category of green cs

    sage: P = Parent(category=Cs().Green())
    sage: P.foo()
    I am a method on green C's

Compared with our first example, the only newcomer is the method
``.Green()`` that can be used by any subcategory ``Ds()`` of ``Cs()``
to add the axiom ``Green``. Note that the expression ``Ds().Green``
always evaluates to this method, regardless of whether ``Ds`` has a
nested class ``Ds.Green`` or not (an implementation detail)::

    sage: Cs().Green
    <bound method Cs_with_category.Green of Category of cs>

Thanks to this feature (implemented in :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__`),
the user is systematically referred to the documentation of this
method when doing introspection on ``Ds().Green``::

    sage: C = Cs()
    sage: C.Green?             # not tested
    sage: Cs().Green.__doc__
    '<documentation of the axiom Green>'

It is therefore the natural spot for the documentation of the axiom.

.. NOTE::

    The presence of the nested class ``Green`` in ``Cs`` is currently
    mandatory even if it is empty.

.. TODO::

    Specify whether or not one should systematically use
    @cached_method in the definition of the axiom. And make sure all
    the definition of axioms in Sage are consistent in this respect!

.. TODO::

    We could possibly define an @axiom decorator? This could hide two
    little implementation details: whether or not to make the method a
    cached method, and the call to _with_axiom(...) under the hood. It
    could do possibly do some more magic. The gain is not obvious though.

.. NOTE::

    ``all_axioms`` is only used marginally, for sanity checks and when
    trying to derive automatically the base category class. The order
    of the axioms in this tuple also controls the order in which they
    appear when printing out categories with axioms (see
    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static`).

    During a Sage session, new axioms should only be added at the *end*
    of ``all_axioms``, as above, so as to not break the cache of
    :func:`axioms_rank`. Otherwise, they can be inserted statically
    anywhere in the tuple. For axioms defined within the Sage library,
    the name is best inserted by editing directly the definition of
    ``all_axioms`` in :mod:`sage.categories.category_with_axiom`.

.. TOPIC:: Design note

    Let us state again that, unlike what the existence of
    ``all_axioms`` might suggest, the definition of an axiom is local
    to a category and its subcategories. In particular, two
    independent categories ``Cs()`` and ``Ds()`` can very well define
    axioms with the same name and different semantics. As long as the
    two hierarchies of subcategories don't intersect, this is not a
    problem. And if they do intersect naturally (that is if one is
    likely to create a parent belonging to both categories), this
    probably means that the categories ``Cs`` and ``Ds`` are about
    related enough areas of mathematics that one should clear the
    ambiguity by having either the same semantic or different names.

    This caveat is no different from that of name clashes in hierarchy
    of classes involving multiple inheritance.

.. TODO::

    Explore ways to get rid of this global ``all_axioms`` tuple,
    and/or have automatic registration there, and/or having a
    register_axiom(...) method.

Special case: defining an axiom depending on several categories
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In some cases, the largest category where the axiom makes sense is the
intersection of two categories. This is typically the case for axioms
specifying compatibility conditions between two otherwise unrelated
operations, like ``Distributive`` which specifies a compatibility
between `*` and `+`. Ideally, we would want the ``Distributive`` axiom
to be defined by::

    sage: Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas()
    Join of Category of magmas and Category of additive magmas

The current infrastructure does not support this perfectly: indeed,
defining an axiom for a category `C` requires `C` to have a class of
its own; hence a :class:`~.category.JoinCategory` as above won't do;
we need to implement a new class like
:class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`;
furthermore, we cannot yet model the fact that ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas()``
*is* the intersection of ``Magmas()`` and ``AdditiveMagmas()`` rather than a
mere subcategory::

    sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
    sage: Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas() is MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas()
    False
    sage: Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas()             # todo: not implemented
    Category of magmas and additive magmas

Still, there is a workaround to get the natural notations::

    sage: (Magmas() & AdditiveMagmas()).Distributive()
    Category of distributive magmas and additive magmas
    sage: (Monoids() & CommutativeAdditiveGroups()).Distributive()
    Category of rings

The trick is to define ``Distributive`` as usual in
:class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`, and to
add a method :meth:`Magmas.SubcategoryMethods.Distributive` which
checks that ``self`` is a subcategory of both ``Magmas()`` and
``AdditiveMagmas()``, complains if not, and otherwise takes the
intersection of ``self`` with ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas()`` before
calling ``Distributive``.

The downsides of this workaround are:

- Creation of an otherwise empty class
  :class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`.

- Pollution of the namespace of ``Magmas()`` (and subcategories like
  ``Groups()``) with a method that is irrelevant (but safely complains
  if called).

- ``C._with_axiom('Distributive')`` is not strictly equivalent to
  ``C.Distributive()``, which can be unpleasantly surprising::

    sage: (Monoids() & CommutativeAdditiveGroups()).Distributive()
    Category of rings

    sage: (Monoids() & CommutativeAdditiveGroups())._with_axiom('Distributive')
    Join of Category of monoids and Category of commutative additive groups

.. TODO::

    Other categories that would be better implemented via an axiom
    depending on a join category include:

    - :class:`Algebras`: defining an associative unital algebra as a
      ring and a module satisfying the suitable compatibility axiom
      between inner multiplication and multiplication by scalars
      (bilinearity). Of course this should be implemented at the level
      of :class:`~.magmatic_algebras.MagmaticAlgebras`, if not higher.

    - :class:`Bialgebras`: defining an bialgebra as an algebra and
      coalgebra where the coproduct is a morphism for the product.

    - :class:`Bimodules`: defining a bimodule as a left and right
      module where the two actions commute.

.. TODO::

    - Design and implement an idiom for the definition of an axiom by a join
      category.

    - Or support more advanced joins, through some hook or registration
      process to specify that a given category *is* the intersection of two
      (or more) categories.

    - Or at least improve the above workaround to avoid the last issue; this
      possibly could be achieved using a class ``Magmas.Distributive`` with a
      bit of ``__classcall__`` magic.

Handling multiple axioms, arborescence structure of the code
------------------------------------------------------------

Prelude
^^^^^^^

Let us consider the category of magmas, together with two of its
axioms, namely ``Associative`` and ``Unital``. An associative magma is
a *semigroup* and a unital semigroup is a *monoid*. We have also seen
that axioms commute::

    sage: Magmas().Unital()
    Category of unital magmas
    sage: Magmas().Associative()
    Category of semigroups
    sage: Magmas().Associative().Unital()
    Category of monoids
    sage: Magmas().Unital().Associative()
    Category of monoids

At the level of the classes implementing these categories, the
following comes as a general naturalization of the previous section::

    sage: Magmas.Unital
    <class 'sage.categories.magmas.Magmas.Unital'>
    sage: Magmas.Associative
    <class 'sage.categories.semigroups.Semigroups'>
    sage: Magmas.Associative.Unital
    <class 'sage.categories.monoids.Monoids'>

However, the following may look suspicious at first::

    sage: Magmas.Unital.Associative
    Traceback (most recent call last):
    ...
    AttributeError: type object 'Magmas.Unital' has no attribute 'Associative'

The purpose of this section is to explain the design of the code
layout and the rationale for this mismatch.

Abstract model
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

As we have seen in the :ref:`Primer <category-primer-axioms-explosion>`,
the objects of a category ``Cs()`` can usually satisfy, or not, many
different axioms. Out of all combinations of axioms, only a small
number are relevant in practice, in the sense that we actually want to
provide features for the objects satisfying these axioms.

Therefore, in the context of the category class ``Cs``, we want to
provide the system with a collection `(D_S)_{S\in \mathcal S}` where
each `S` is a subset of the axioms and the corresponding `D_S` is a
class for the subcategory of the objects of ``Cs()`` satisfying the
axioms in `S`. For example, if ``Cs()`` is the category of magmas, the
pairs `(S, D_S)` would include::

    {Associative}                 : Semigroups
    {Associative, Unital}         : Monoids
    {Associative, Unital, Inverse}: Groups
    {Associative, Commutative}    : Commutative Semigroups
    {Unital,      Inverse}        : Loops

Then, given a subset `T` of axioms, we want the system to be able to
select automatically the relevant classes
`(D_S)_{S\in \mathcal S, S\subset T}`,
and build from them a category for the objects of ``Cs`` satisfying
the axioms in `T`, together with its hierarchy of super categories. If
`T` is in the indexing set `\mathcal S`, then the class of the
resulting category is directly `D_T`::

    sage: C = Magmas().Unital().Inverse().Associative(); C
    Category of groups
    sage: type(C)
    <class 'sage.categories.groups.Groups_with_category'>

Otherwise, we get a join category::

    sage: C = Magmas().Infinite().Unital().Associative(); C
    Category of infinite monoids
    sage: type(C)
    <class 'sage.categories.category.JoinCategory_with_category'>
    sage: C.super_categories()
    [Category of monoids, Category of infinite sets]

Concrete model as an arborescence of nested classes
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

We further want the construction to be efficient and amenable to
laziness. This led us to the following design decision: the collection
`(D_S)_{S\in \mathcal S}` of classes should be structured as an
arborescence (or equivalently a *rooted forest*). The root is ``Cs``,
corresponding to `S=\emptyset`. Any other class `D_S` should be the
child of a single class `D_{S'}` where `S'` is obtained from `S` by
removing a single axiom `A`. Of course, `D_{S'}` and `A` are
respectively the base category class and axiom of the category with
axiom `D_S` that we have met in the first section.

At this point, we urge the reader to explore the code of
:class:`Magmas` and
:class:`~.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`
and see how the arborescence structure on the categories with axioms
is reflected by the nesting of category classes.

Discussion of the design
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Performance
~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks to the arborescence structure on subsets of axioms,
constructing the hierarchy of categories and computing intersections
can be made efficient with, roughly speaking, a linear/quadratic
complexity in the size of the involved category hierarchy multiplied
by the number of axioms (see Section :ref:`axioms-algorithmic`). This
is to be put in perspective with the manipulation of arbitrary
collections of subsets (aka boolean functions) which can easily raise
NP-hard problems.

Furthermore, thanks to its locality, the algorithms can be made
suitably lazy: in particular, only the involved category classes need
to be imported.

Flexibility
~~~~~~~~~~~

This design also brings in quite some flexibility, with the
possibility to support features such as defining new axioms depending
on other axioms and deduction rules. See below.

Asymmetry
~~~~~~~~~

As we have seen at the beginning of this section, this design
introduces an asymmetry. It's not so bad in practice, since in most
practical cases, we want to work incrementally. It's for example more
natural to describe :class:`FiniteFields` as :class:`Fields` with the
axiom ``Finite`` rather than :class:`Magmas` and
:class:`AdditiveMagmas` with all (or at least sufficiently many) of
the following axioms::

    sage: sorted(Fields().axioms())
    ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
     'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Commutative', 'Distributive',
     'Division', 'NoZeroDivisors', 'Unital']

The main limitation is that the infrastructure currently imposes to be
incremental by steps of a single axiom.

In practice, among the roughly 60 categories with axioms that are
currently implemented in Sage, most admitted a (rather) natural choice
of a base category and single axiom to add. For example, one usually
thinks more naturally of a monoid as a semigroup which is unital
rather than as a unital magma which is associative. Modeling this
asymmetry in the code actually brings a bonus: it is used for printing
out categories in a (heuristically) mathematician-friendly way::

    sage: Magmas().Commutative().Associative()
    Category of commutative semigroups

Only in a few cases is a choice made that feels mathematically
arbitrary. This is essentially in the chain of nested classes
:class:`.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveUnital.Associative`.

Placeholder classes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Given that we can only add a single axiom at a time when implementing
a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom`, we need to create a few category classes
that are just placeholders. For the worst example, see the chain of
nested classes
:class:`.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveUnital.Associative`.

This is suboptimal, but fits within the scope of the axiom
infrastructure which is to reduce a potentially exponential number of
placeholder category classes to just a couple.

Note also that, in the above example, it's likely that some of the
intermediate classes will grow to non placeholder ones, as people will
explore more weaker variants of rings.

Mismatch between the arborescence of nested classes and the hierarchy of categories
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The fact that the hierarchy relation between categories is not
reflected directly as a relation between the classes may sound
suspicious at first! However, as mentioned in the primer, this is
actually a big selling point of the axioms infrastructure: by
calculating automatically the hierarchy relation between categories
with axioms one avoids the nightmare of maintaining it by hand.
Instead, only a rather minimal number of links needs to be maintainted
in the code (one per category with axiom).

Besides, with the flexibility introduced by runtime deduction rules
(see below), the hierarchy of categories may depend on the parameters
of the categories and not just their class. So it's fine to make it
clear from the onset that the two relations do not match.

Evolutivity
~~~~~~~~~~~

At this point, the arborescence structure has to be hardcoded by hand
with the annoyances we have seen. This does not preclude, in a future
iteration, to design and implement some idiom for categories with
axioms that adds several axioms at once to a base category; maybe some
variation around::

    class DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas:
        ...

        @category_with_axiom(
            AdditiveAssociative,
            AdditiveCommutative,
            AdditiveUnital,
            AdditiveInverse,
            Associative)
        def _(): return LazyImport('sage.categories.rngs', 'Rngs', at_startup=True)

or::

    register_axiom_category(DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas,
                            {AdditiveAssociative,
                             AdditiveCommutative,
                             AdditiveUnital,
                             AdditiveInverse,
                             Associative},
                            'sage.categories.rngs', 'Rngs', at_startup=True)

The infrastructure would then be in charge of building the appropriate
arborescence under the hood. Or rely on some database (see discussion
on :trac:`10963`, in particular at the end of comment 332).

Axioms defined upon other axioms
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sometimes an axiom can only be defined when some other axiom
holds. For example, the axiom ``NoZeroDivisors`` only makes sense if
there is a zero, that is if the axiom ``AdditiveUnital`` holds. Hence,
for the category
:class:`~.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas`, we
consider in the abstract model only those subsets of axioms where the
presence of ``NoZeroDivisors`` implies that of ``AdditiveUnital``.  We
also want the axiom to be only available if meaningful::

    sage: Rings().NoZeroDivisors()
    Category of domains
    sage: Rings().Commutative().NoZeroDivisors()
    Category of integral domains
    sage: Semirings().NoZeroDivisors()
    Traceback (most recent call last):
    ...
    AttributeError: 'Semirings_with_category' object has no attribute 'NoZeroDivisors'

Concretely, this is to be implemented by defining the new axiom in the
(``SubcategoryMethods`` nested class of the) appropriate category with
axiom. For example the axiom ``NoZeroDivisors`` would be naturally
defined in
:class:`.magmas_and_additive_magmas.MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.Distributive.AdditiveUnital`.

.. NOTE::

    The axiom ``NoZeroDivisors`` is currently defined in
    :class:`Rings`, by simple lack of need for the feature; it should
    be lifted up as soon as relevant, that is when some code will be
    available for parents with no zero divisors that are not
    necessarily rings.

.. _axioms-deduction-rules:

Deduction rules
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A similar situation is when an axiom ``A`` of a category ``Cs``
implies some other axiom ``B``, with the same consequence as above on
the subsets of axioms appearing in the abstract model. For example, a
division ring necessarily has no zero divisors::

    sage: 'NoZeroDivisors' in Rings().Division().axioms()
    True
    sage: 'NoZeroDivisors' in Rings().axioms()
    False

This deduction rule is implemented by the method
:meth:`Rings.Division.extra_super_categories`::

    sage: Rings().Division().extra_super_categories()
    (Category of domains,)

In general, this is to be implemented by a method
``Cs.A.extra_super_categories`` returning a tuple ``(Cs().B(),)``, or
preferably ``(Ds().B(),)`` where ``Ds`` is the category defining the
axiom ``B``.

This follows the same idiom as for deduction rules about functorial
constructions (see :meth:`.covariant_functorial_construction.CovariantConstructionCategory.extra_super_categories`).
For example, the fact that a Cartesian product of associative magmas
(i.e. of semigroups) is an associative magma is implemented in
:meth:`Semigroups.CartesianProducts.extra_super_categories`::

    sage: Magmas().Associative()
    Category of semigroups
    sage: Magmas().Associative().CartesianProducts().extra_super_categories()
    [Category of semigroups]

Similarly, the fact that the algebra of a commutative magma is
commutative is implemented in
:meth:`Magmas.Commutative.Algebras.extra_super_categories`::

    sage: Magmas().Commutative().Algebras(QQ).extra_super_categories()
    [Category of commutative magmas]

.. WARNING::

    In some situations this idiom is inapplicable as it would require
    to implement two classes for the same category. This is the
    purpose of the next section.

Special case
~~~~~~~~~~~~

In the previous examples, the deduction rule only had an influence on
the super categories of the category with axiom being constructed. For
example, when constructing ``Rings().Division()``, the rule
:meth:`Rings.Division.extra_super_categories` simply adds
``Rings().NoZeroDivisors()`` as a super category thereof.

In some situations this idiom is inapplicable because a class for the
category with axiom under construction already exists elsewhere. Take
for example Wedderburn's theorem: any finite division ring is
commutative, i.e. is a finite field. In other words,
``DivisionRings().Finite()`` *coincides* with ``Fields().Finite()``::

        sage: DivisionRings().Finite()
        Category of finite enumerated fields
        sage: DivisionRings().Finite() is Fields().Finite()
        True

Therefore we cannot create a class ``DivisionRings.Finite`` to hold
the desired ``extra_super_categories`` method, because there is
already a class for this category with axiom, namely
``Fields.Finite``.

A natural idiom would be to have ``DivisionRings.Finite`` be a link to
``Fields.Finite`` (locally introducing an undirected cycle in the
arborescence of nested classes). It would be a bit tricky to implement
though, since one would need to detect, upon constructing
``DivisionRings().Finite()``, that ``DivisionRings.Finite`` is
actually ``Fields.Finite``, in order to construct appropriately
``Fields().Finite()``; and reciprocally, upon computing the super
categories of ``Fields().Finite()``, to not try to add
``DivisionRings().Finite()`` as a super category.

Instead the current idiom is to have a method
``DivisionRings.Finite_extra_super_categories`` which mimicks the
behavior of the would-be
``DivisionRings.Finite.extra_super_categories``::

    sage: DivisionRings().Finite_extra_super_categories()
    (Category of commutative magmas,)

This idiom is admittedly rudimentary, but consistent with how
mathematical facts specifying non trivial inclusion relations between
categories are implemented elsewhere in the various
``extra_super_categories`` methods of axiom categories and covariant
functorial constructions. Besides, it gives a natural spot (the
docstring of the method) to document and test the modeling of the
mathematical fact. Finally, Wedderburn's theorem is arguably a theorem
about division rings (in the context of division rings, finiteness
implies commutativity) and therefore lives naturally in
:class:`DivisionRings`.

An alternative would be to implement the category of finite division
rings (i.e. finite fields) in a class ``DivisionRings.Finite`` rather
than ``Fields.Finite``::

    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom

    sage: class MyDivisionRings(Category):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [Rings()]

    sage: class MyFields(Category):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [MyDivisionRings()]

    sage: class MyFiniteFields(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:     _base_category_class_and_axiom = (MyDivisionRings, "Finite")
    ....:     def extra_super_categories(self): # Wedderburn's theorem
    ....:         return [MyFields()]

    sage: MyDivisionRings.Finite = MyFiniteFields

    sage: MyDivisionRings().Finite()
    Category of my finite fields
    sage: MyFields().Finite() is MyDivisionRings().Finite()
    True

In general, if several categories ``C1s()``, ``C2s()``, ... are mapped to
the same category when applying some axiom ``A`` (that is ``C1s().A()
== C2s().A() == ...``), then one should be careful to implement this
category in a single class ``Cs.A``, and set up methods
``extra_super_categories`` or ``A_extra_super_categories`` methods as
appropriate. Each such method should return something like
``[C2s()]`` and not ``[C2s().A()]`` for the latter would likely lead
to an infinite recursion.

.. TOPIC:: Design discussion

    Supporting similar deduction rules will be an important feature in
    the future, with quite a few occurrences already implemented in
    upcoming tickets. For the time being though there is a single
    occurrence of this idiom outside of the tests. So this would be an
    easy thing to refactor after :trac:`10963` if a better idiom is
    found.

Larger synthetic examples
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We now consider some larger synthetic examples to check that the
machinery works as expected. Let us start with a category defining a
bunch of axioms, using :func:`axiom` for conciseness (don't do it for
real axioms; they deserve a full documentation!)::

    sage: from sage.categories.category_singleton import Category_singleton
    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import axiom
    sage: import sage.categories.category_with_axiom
    sage: all_axioms = sage.categories.category_with_axiom.all_axioms
    sage: all_axioms += ("B","C","D","E","F")

    sage: class As(Category_singleton):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [Objects()]
    ....:
    ....:     class SubcategoryMethods:
    ....:         B = axiom("B")
    ....:         C = axiom("C")
    ....:         D = axiom("D")
    ....:         E = axiom("E")
    ....:         F = axiom("F")
    ....:
    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         pass
    ....:     class C(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         pass
    ....:     class D(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         pass
    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         pass
    ....:     class F(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         pass

Now we construct a subcategory where, by some theorem of William,
axioms ``B`` and ``C`` together are equivalent to ``E`` and ``F``
together::

    sage: class A1s(Category_singleton):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [As()]
    ....:
    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         def C_extra_super_categories(self):
    ....:             return [As().E(), As().F()]
    ....:
    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         def F_extra_super_categories(self):
    ....:             return [As().B(), As().C()]

    sage: A1s().B().C()
    Category of e f a1s

The axioms ``B`` and ``C`` do not show up in the name of the obtained
category because, for concision, the printing uses some heuristics to
not show axioms that are implied by others. But they are satisfied::

    sage: sorted(A1s().B().C().axioms())
    ['B', 'C', 'E', 'F']

Note also that this is a join category::

    sage: type(A1s().B().C())
    <class 'sage.categories.category.JoinCategory_with_category'>
    sage: A1s().B().C().super_categories()
    [Category of e a1s,
     Category of f as,
     Category of b a1s,
     Category of c as]

As desired, William's theorem holds::

    sage: A1s().B().C() is A1s().E().F()
    True

and propagates appropriately to subcategories::

    sage: C =  A1s().E().F().D().B().C()
    sage: C is A1s().B().C().E().F().D()  # commutativity
    True
    sage: C is A1s().E().F().E().F().D()  # William's theorem
    True
    sage: C is A1s().E().E().F().F().D()  # commutativity
    True
    sage: C is A1s().E().F().D()          # idempotency
    True
    sage: C is A1s().D().E().F()
    True

In this quick variant, we actually implement the category of ``b c
a2s``, and choose to do so in ``A2s.B.C``::

    sage: class A2s(Category_singleton):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [As()]
    ....:
    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         class C(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:             def extra_super_categories(self):
    ....:                 return [As().E(), As().F()]
    ....:
    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         def F_extra_super_categories(self):
    ....:             return [As().B(), As().C()]


    sage: A2s().B().C()
    Category of e f a2s
    sage: sorted(A2s().B().C().axioms())
    ['B', 'C', 'E', 'F']
    sage: type(A2s().B().C())
    <class '__main__.A2s.B.C_with_category'>

As desired, William's theorem and its consequences hold::

    sage: A2s().B().C() is A2s().E().F()
    True
    sage: C =  A2s().E().F().D().B().C()
    sage: C is A2s().B().C().E().F().D()  # commutativity
    True
    sage: C is A2s().E().F().E().F().D()  # William's theorem
    True
    sage: C is A2s().E().E().F().F().D()  # commutativity
    True
    sage: C is A2s().E().F().D()          # idempotency
    True
    sage: C is A2s().D().E().F()
    True

Finally, we "accidentally" implement the category of ``b c a1s``, both
in ``A3s.B.C`` and ``A3s.E.F``::

    sage: class A3s(Category_singleton):
    ....:     def super_categories(self):
    ....:         return [As()]
    ....:
    ....:     class B(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         class C(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:             def extra_super_categories(self):
    ....:                 return [As().E(), As().F()]
    ....:
    ....:     class E(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:         class F(CategoryWithAxiom):
    ....:             def extra_super_categories(self):
    ....:                 return [As().B(), As().C()]

We can still construct, say::

    sage: A3s().B()
    Category of b a3s
    sage: A3s().C()
    Category of c a3s

However,
::

    sage: A3s().B().C()           # not tested

runs into an infinite recursion loop, as ``A3s().B().C()`` wants to
have ``A3s().E().F()`` as super category and reciprocally.

.. TODO::

    The above example violates the specifications (a category should
    be modelled by at most one class), so it's appropriate that it
    fails. Yet, the error message could be usefully complemented by
    some hint at what the source of the problem is (a category
    implemented in two distinct classes). Leaving a large enough piece
    of the backtrace would be useful though, so that one can explore
    where the issue comes from (e.g. with post mortem debugging).

Specifications
==============

After fixing some vocabulary, we summarize here some specifications
about categories and axioms.

The lattice of constructible categories
---------------------------------------

A mathematical category `C` is *implemented* if there is a class in
Sage modelling it; it is *constructible* if it is either implemented,
or is the intersection of *implemented* categories; in the latter case
it is modelled by a :class:`~.category.JoinCategory`. The comparison of two
constructible categories with the :meth:`Category.is_subcategory`
method is supposed to model the comparison of the corresponding
mathematical categories for inclusion of the objects (see
:ref:`category-primer-subcategory` for details). For example::

    sage: Fields().is_subcategory(Rings())
    True

However this modelling may be incomplete. It can happen that a
mathematical fact implying that a category `A` is a subcategory of a
category `B` is not implemented. Still, the comparison should endow
the set of constructible categories with a poset structure and in fact
a lattice structure.

In this lattice, the join of two categories (:meth:`Category.join`) is
supposed to model their intersection. Given that we compare categories
for inclusion, it would be more natural to call this operation the
*meet*; blames go to me (Nicolas) for originally comparing categories
by *amount of structure* rather than by *inclusion*. In practice, the
join of two categories may be a strict super category of their
intersection; first because this intersection might not be
constructible; second because Sage might miss some mathematical
information to recover the smallest constructible super category of
the intersection.

Axioms
------

We say that an axiom ``A`` is *defined by* a category ``Cs()`` if
``Cs`` defines an appropriate method ``Cs.SubcategoryMethods.A``, with
the semantic of the axiom specified in the documentation; for any
subcategory ``Ds()``, ``Ds().A()`` models the subcategory of the
objects of ``Ds()`` satisfying ``A``. In this case, we say that the
axiom ``A`` is *defined for* the category ``Ds()``. Furthermore,
``Ds`` *implements the axiom* ``A`` if ``Ds`` has a category with
axiom as nested class ``Ds.A``. The category ``Ds()`` *satisfies* the
axiom if ``Ds()`` is a subcategory of ``Cs().A()`` (meaning that all
the objects of ``Ds()`` are known to satisfy the axiom ``A``).

A digression on the structure of fibers when adding an axiom
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Consider the application `\phi_A` which maps a category to its
category of objects satisfying `A`. Equivalently, `\phi_A` is
computing the intersection with the defining category with axiom of
`A`. It follows immediately from the latter that `\phi_A` is a
regressive endomorphism of the lattice of categories. It restricts
to a regressive endomorphism ``Cs() |-> Cs().A()``
on the lattice of constructible categories.

This endomorphism may have non trivial fibers, as in our favorite
example: ``DivisionRings()`` and ``Fields()`` are in the same fiber
for the axiom ``Finite``::

    sage: DivisionRings().Finite() is Fields().Finite()
    True

Consider the intersection `S` of such a fiber of `\phi_A` with the
upper set `I_A` of categories that do not satisfy ``A``. The fiber
itself is a sublattice. However `I_A` is not guaranteed to be stable
under intersection (though exceptions should be rare). Therefore,
there is a priori no guarantee that `S` would be stable under
intersection. Also it's presumably finite, in fact small, but this is
not guaranteed either.

Specifications
--------------

- Any constructible category ``C`` should admit a finite number of
  larger constructible categories.

- The methods ``super_categories``, ``extra_super_categories``, and
  friends should always return strict supercategories.

  For example, to specify that a finite division ring is a finite
  field, ``DivisionRings.Finite_extra_super_categories`` should not
  return ``Fields().Finite()``! It could possibly return ``Fields()``;
  but it's preferable to return the largest category that contains the
  relevant information, in this case ``Magmas().Commutative()``, and
  to let the infrastructure apply the derivations.

- The base category of a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` should be an
  implemented category (i.e. not a
  :class:`~.category.JoinCategory`). This is checked by
  :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom`.

- Arborescent structure: Let ``Cs()`` be a category, and `S` be some
  set of axioms defined in some super categories of ``Cs()`` but not
  satisfied by ``Cs()``. Suppose we want to provide a category with
  axiom for the elements of ``Cs()`` satisfying the axioms in
  `S`. Then, there should be a single enumeration ``A1, A2, ..., Ak``
  without repetition of axioms in `S` such that
  ``Cs.A1.A2....Ak`` is an implemented category.
  Furthermore, every intermediate step
  ``Cs.A1.A2....Ai`` with `i\leq k` should be a category with axiom
  having ``Ai`` as axiom and ``Cs.A1.A2....Ai-1`` as base category
  class; this base category class should not satisfy ``Ai``. In
  particular, when some axioms of `S` can be deduced from previous
  ones by deduction rules, they should not appear in the enumeration
  ``A1, A2, ..., Ak``.

- In particular, if ``Cs()`` is a category that satisfies some axiom
  ``A`` (e.g. from one of its super categories), then it should not
  implement that axiom. For example, a category class ``Cs`` can never
  have a nested class ``Cs.A.A``. Similarly, applying the
  specification recursively, a category satisfying ``A`` cannot have a
  nested class ``Cs.A1.A2.A3.A`` where ``A1``, ``A2``, ``A3`` are
  axioms.

- A category can only implement an axiom if this axiom is defined by
  some super category. The code has not been systematically checked to
  support having two super categories defining the same axiom (which
  should of course have the same semantic). You are welcome to try, at
  your own risk. :-)

- When a category defines an axiom or functorial construction ``A``,
  this fixes the semantic of ``A`` for all the subcategories. In
  particular, if two categories define ``A``, then these categories
  should be independent, and either the semantic of ``A`` should be
  the same, or there should be no natural intersection between the two
  hierarchies of subcategories.

- Any super category of a
  :class:`~.category.CategoryWithParameters` should either be a
  :class:`~.category.CategoryWithParameters` or a
  :class:`Category_singleton`.

- A :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` having a
  :class:`~sage.categories.category_singleton.Category_singleton` as base
  category should be a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom_singleton`. This is handled
  automatically by :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__init__` and checked in
  :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom`.

- A :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` having a
  :class:`Category_over_base_ring` as base category should be a
  :class:`Category_over_base_ring`. This currently has to be handled
  by hand, using :class:`CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring`. This is
  checked in :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom._test_category_with_axiom`.

.. TODO::

    The following specifications would be desirable but are not yet
    implemented:

    - A functorial construction category (Graded, CartesianProducts,
      ...) having a :class:`Category_singleton` as base category
      should be a :class:`CategoryWithAxiom_singleton`.

      Nothing difficult to implement, but this will need to rework the
      current "no subclass of a concrete class" assertion test of
      :meth:`Category_singleton.__classcall__`.

    - Similarly, a covariant functorial construction category having a
      :class:`Category_over_base_ring` as base category should be a
      :class:`Category_over_base_ring`.

    The following specification might be desirable, or not:

    - A join category involving a :class:`Category_over_base_ring`
      should be a :class:`Category_over_base_ring`. In the mean
      time, a ``base_ring`` method is automatically provided for most
      of those by :meth:`Modules.SubcategoryMethods.base_ring`.


Design goals
============

As pointed out in the primer, the main design goal of the axioms
infrastructure is to subdue the potential combinatorial explosion of
the category hierarchy by letting the developer focus on implementing
a few bookshelves for which there is actual code or mathematical
information, and let Sage *compose dynamically and lazily* these
building blocks to construct the minimal hierarchy of classes needed
for the computation at hand. This allows for the infrastructure to
scale smoothly as bookshelves are added, extended, or reorganized.

Other design goals include:

 - Flexibility in the code layout: the category of, say, finite sets
   can be implemented either within the Sets category (in a nested
   class ``Sets.Finite``), or in a separate file (typically in a class
   ``FiniteSets`` in a lazily imported module
   sage.categories.finite_sets).

 - Single point of truth: a theorem, like Wedderburn's, should be
   implemented in a single spot.

 - Single entry point: for example, from the entry :class:`Rings`, one
   can explore a whole range of related categories just by applying
   axioms and constructions::

       sage: Rings().Commutative().Finite().NoZeroDivisors()
       Category of finite integral domains
       sage: Rings().Finite().Division()
       Category of finite enumerated fields

   This will allow for progressively getting rid of all the entries
   like :class:`GradedHopfAlgebrasWithBasis` which are polluting the
   global name space.

   Note that this is not about precluding the existence of multiple
   natural ways to construct the same category::

       sage: Groups().Finite()
       Category of finite groups
       sage: Monoids().Finite().Inverse()
       Category of finite groups
       sage: Sets().Finite() & Monoids().Inverse()
       Category of finite groups

 - Concise idioms for the users (adding axioms, ...)

 - Concise idioms and well highlighted hierarchy of bookshelves for
   the developer (especially with code folding)

 - Introspection friendly (listing the axioms, recovering the mixins)

.. NOTE::

    The constructor for instances of this class takes as input the
    base category. Hence, they should in principle be constructed
    as::

        sage: FiniteSets(Sets())
        Category of finite sets

        sage: Sets.Finite(Sets())
        Category of finite sets

    None of these idioms are really practical for the user. So instead,
    this object is to be constructed using any of the following idioms::

        sage: Sets()._with_axiom('Finite')
        Category of finite sets
        sage: FiniteSets()
        Category of finite sets
        sage: Sets().Finite()
        Category of finite sets

    The later two are implemented using respectively
    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classcall__` and
    :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__`.

Upcoming features
=================

.. TODO::

    - Implement compatibility axiom / functorial constructions. For
      example, one would want to have::

          A.CartesianProducts() & B.CartesianProducts() = (A&B).CartesianProducts()

    - Once full subcategories are implemented (see :trac:`10668`),
      make the relevant categories with axioms be such. This can be
      done systematically for, e.g., the axioms ``Associative`` or
      ``Commutative``, but not for the axiom ``Unital``: a semigroup
      morphism between two monoids need not preserve the unit.

      Should all full subcategories be implemented in term of axioms?

.. _axioms-algorithmic:

Algorithms
==========

Computing joins
---------------

The workhorse of the axiom infrastructure is the algorithm for
computing the join `J` of a set `C_1, \ldots, C_k` of categories (see
:meth:`Category.join`). Formally, `J` is defined as the largest
constructible category such that `J \subset C_i` for all `i`, and
`J \subset C.A()` for every constructible category `C \supset J`
and any axiom `A` satisfied by `J`.

The join `J` is naturally computed as a closure in the lattice of
constructible categories: it starts with the `C_i`'s, gathers the set
`S` of all the axioms satisfied by them, and repeatedly adds each
axiom `A` to those categories that do not yet satisfy `A` using
:meth:`Category._with_axiom`. Due to deduction rules or (extra) super
categories, new categories or new axioms may appear in the
process. The process stops when each remaining category has been
combined with each axiom. In practice, only the smallest categories
are kept along the way; this is correct because adding an axiom is
covariant: ``C.A()`` is a subcategory of ``D.A()`` whenever ``C`` is a
subcategory of ``D``.

As usual in such closure computations, the result does not depend on
the order of execution. Futhermore, given that adding an axiom is an
idempotent and regressive operation, the process is guaranteed to stop
in a number of steps which is bounded by the number of super
categories of `J`. In particular, it is a finite process.

.. TODO::

    Detail this a bit. What could typically go wrong is a situation
    where, for some category ``C1``, ``C1.A()`` specifies a category
    ``C2`` as super category such that ``C2.A()`` specifies ``C3`` as
    super category such that ...; this would clearly cause an infinite
    execution. Note that this situation violates the specifications
    since ``C1.A()`` is supposed to be a subcategory of ``C2.A()``,
    ... so we would have an infinite increasing chain of constructible
    categories.

    It's reasonable to assume that there is a finite number of axioms
    defined in the code. There remains to use this assumption to argue
    that any infinite execution of the algorithm would give rise to
    such an infinite sequence.

Adding an axiom
---------------

Let ``Cs`` be a category and ``A`` an axiom defined for this
category. To compute ``Cs().A()``, there are two cases.

Adding an axiom ``A`` to a category ``Cs()`` not implementing it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In this case, ``Cs().A()`` returns the join of:

- ``Cs()``
- ``Bs().A()`` for every direct super category ``Bs()`` of ``Cs()``
- the categories appearing in ``Cs().A_extra_super_categories()``

This is a highly recursive process. In fact, as such, it would run
right away into an infinite loop! Indeed, the join of ``Cs()`` with
``Bs().A()`` would trigger the construction of ``Cs().A()`` and
reciprocally. To avoid this, the :meth:`Category.join` method itself
does not use :meth:`Category._with_axiom` to add axioms, but its
sister :meth:`Category._with_axiom_as_tuple`; the latter builds a
tuple of categories that should be joined together but leaves the
computation of the join to its caller, the master join calculation.

Adding an axiom ``A`` to a category ``Cs()`` implementing it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In this case ``Cs().A()`` simply constructs an instance `D` of
``Cs.A`` which models the desired category. The non trivial part is
the construction of the super categories of `D`. Very much like
above, this includes:

- ``Cs()``
- ``Bs().A()`` for every super category ``Bs()`` of ``Cs()``
- the categories appearing in ``D.extra_super_categories()``

This by itself may not be sufficient, due in particular to deduction
rules. On may for example discover a new axiom ``A1`` satisfied by
`D`, imposing to add ``A1`` to all of the above categories. Therefore
the super categories are computed as the join of the above categories.
Up to one twist: as is, the computation of this join would trigger
recursively a recalculation of ``Cs().A()``! To avoid this,
:meth:`Category.join` is given an optional argument to specify that
the axiom ``A`` should *not* be applied to ``Cs()``.

Sketch of proof of correctness and evaluation of complexity
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

As we have seen, this is a highly recursive process! In particular,
one needs to argue that, as long as the specifications are satisfied,
the algorithm won't run in an infinite recursion, in particular in
case of deduction rule.

.. TOPIC:: Theorem

    Consider the construction of a category `C` by adding an axiom to
    a category (or computing of a join). Let `H` be the hierarchy of
    implemented categories above `C`. Let `n` and `m` be respectively
    the number of categories and the number of inheritance edges in
    `H`.

    Assuming that the specifications are satisfied, the construction
    of `C` involves constructing the categories in `H` exactly once
    (and no other category), and at most `n` join calculations. In
    particular, the time complexity should be, roughly speaking,
    bounded by `n^2`. In particular, it's finite.

.. TOPIC:: Remark

    It's actually to be expected that the complexity is more of the
    order of magnitude of `na+m`, where `a` is the number of axioms
    satisfied by `C`. But this is to be checked in detail, in
    particular due to the many category inclusion tests involved.

The key argument is that :class:`Category.join` cannot call itself
recursively without going through the construction of some implemented
category. In turn, the construction of some implemented category `C`
only involves constructing strictly smaller categories, and possibly a
direct join calculation whose result is strictly smaller than
`C`. This statement is obvious if `C` implements the
``super_categories`` method directly, and easy to check for functorial
construction categories. It requires a proof for categories with
axioms since there is a recursive join involved.

.. TOPIC:: Lemma

    Let `C` be a category implementing an axiom `A`. Recall that the
    construction of ``C.A()`` involves a single direct join
    calculation for computing the super categories. No other direct
    join calculation occur, and the calculation involves only
    implemented categories that are strictly smaller than ``C.A()``.

.. TOPIC:: Proof

   Let `D` be a category involved in the join calculation for the
   super categories of ``C.A()``, and assume by induction that `D` is
   strictly smaller than ``C.A()``. A category `E` newly constructed
   from `D` can come from:

   - ``D.(extra_)super_categories()``

     In this case, the specifications impose that `E` should be
     strictly smaller than `D` and therefore strictly smaller than
     `C`.

   - ``D.with_axiom_as_tuple('B')`` or ``D.B_extra_super_categories()``
     for some axiom `B`

     In this case, the axiom `B` is satisfied by some subcategory of
     ``C.A()``, and therefore must be satisfied by ``C.A()`` itself.
     Since adding an axiom is a regressive construction, `E` must be a
     subcategory of ``C.A()``. If there is equality, then `E` and
     ``C.A()`` must have the same class, and therefore, `E` must be
     directly constructed as ``C.A()``. However the join construction
     explicitly prevents this call.

   Note that a call to ``D.with_axiom_as_tuple('B')`` does not trigger
   a direct join calculation; but of course, if `D` implements `B`,
   the construction of the implemented category ``E = D.B()`` will
   involve a strictly smaller join calculation.


Conclusion
==========

This is the end of the axioms documentation. Congratulations on
having read that far!


Tests
=====

.. NOTE::

    Quite a few categories with axioms are constructed early on during
    Sage's startup. Therefore, when playing around with the
    implementation of the axiom infrastructure, it is easy to break
    Sage. The following sequence of tests is designed to test the
    infrastructure from the ground up even in a partially broken
    Sage. Please don't remove the imports!

TESTS:

::

    sage: Magmas()
    Category of magmas
    sage: Magmas().Finite()
    Category of finite magmas

    sage: Magmas().Unital()
    Category of unital magmas
    sage: Magmas().Commutative().Unital()
    Category of commutative unital magmas
    sage: Magmas().Associative()
    Category of semigroups
    sage: Magmas().Associative() & Magmas().Unital().Inverse() & Sets().Finite()
    Category of finite groups
    sage: _ is Groups().Finite()
    True

    sage: from sage.categories.semigroups import Semigroups
    sage: Semigroups()
    Category of semigroups
    sage: Semigroups().Finite()
    Category of finite semigroups

    sage: from sage.categories.modules_with_basis import ModulesWithBasis
    sage: ModulesWithBasis(QQ) is Modules(QQ).WithBasis()
    True
    sage: ModulesWithBasis(ZZ) is Modules(ZZ).WithBasis()
    True

    sage: Semigroups().Unital()
    Category of monoids
    sage: Semigroups().Unital().Commutative()
    Category of commutative monoids
    sage: Semigroups().Commutative()
    Category of commutative semigroups
    sage: Semigroups().Commutative().Unital()
    Category of commutative monoids
    sage: Semigroups().Commutative().Unital().super_categories()
    [Category of monoids, Category of commutative magmas]

    sage: AdditiveMagmas().AdditiveAssociative().AdditiveCommutative()
    Category of commutative additive semigroups

    sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
    sage: C = CommutativeAdditiveMonoids() & Monoids() & MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive(); C
    Category of semirings
    sage: C is (CommutativeAdditiveMonoids() & Monoids()).Distributive()
    True
    sage: C.AdditiveInverse()
    Category of rings
    sage: Rings().axioms()
    frozenset({'AdditiveAssociative',
               'AdditiveCommutative',
               'AdditiveInverse',
               'AdditiveUnital',
               'Associative',
               'Distributive',
               'Unital'})
    sage: sorted(Rings().axioms())
    ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
     'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Distributive', 'Unital']

    sage: Domains().Commutative()
    Category of integral domains

    sage: DivisionRings().Finite() # Wedderburn's theorem
    Category of finite enumerated fields

    sage: FiniteMonoids().Algebras(QQ)
    Join of Category of monoid algebras over Rational Field
        and Category of finite dimensional algebras with basis over Rational Field
        and Category of finite set algebras over Rational Field
    sage: FiniteGroups().Algebras(QQ)
    Category of finite group algebras over Rational Field
"""
#*****************************************************************************
#  Copyright (C) 2011-2014 Nicolas M. Thiery <nthiery at users.sf.net>
#
#  Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL)
#                  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
#*****************************************************************************
from __future__ import print_function

import importlib
import re
from sage.misc.cachefunc import cached_method, cached_function
from sage.misc.lazy_attribute import lazy_class_attribute
from sage.misc.lazy_import import LazyImport
from sage.misc.misc import call_method
from sage.categories.category import Category
from sage.categories.category_singleton import Category_singleton
from sage.categories.category_types import Category_over_base_ring
from sage.structure.dynamic_class import DynamicMetaclass
from sage.categories.category_cy_helper import AxiomContainer, canonicalize_axioms, _sort_uniq

# The order of the axioms in this lists implies that
# Magmas().Commutative().Unital() is printed as
# ``Category of commutative unital magmas''

all_axioms = AxiomContainer()
all_axioms += ("Flying", "Blue",
               "Compact",
               "Differentiable", "Smooth", "Analytic", "AlmostComplex",
               "FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma",
               "WellGenerated",
               "Facade", "Finite", "Infinite","Enumerated",
               "Complete",
               "FiniteDimensional", "Connected", "WithBasis",
               "Irreducible",
               "Commutative", "Associative", "Inverse", "Unital", "Division", "NoZeroDivisors",
               "AdditiveCommutative", "AdditiveAssociative", "AdditiveInverse", "AdditiveUnital",
               "Distributive",
               "Endset",
               "Pointed"
              )

def uncamelcase(s,separator=" "):
    """
    EXAMPLES::

        sage: sage.categories.category_with_axiom.uncamelcase("FiniteDimensionalAlgebras")
        'finite dimensional algebras'
        sage: sage.categories.category_with_axiom.uncamelcase("JTrivialMonoids")
        'j trivial monoids'
        sage: sage.categories.category_with_axiom.uncamelcase("FiniteDimensionalAlgebras", "_")
        'finite_dimensional_algebras'
    """
    return re.sub("(?!^)[A-Z]", lambda match: separator+match.group()[0], s).lower()

def base_category_class_and_axiom(cls):
    """
    Try to deduce the base category and the axiom from the name of ``cls``.

    The heuristic is to try to decompose the name as the concatenation
    of the name of a category and the name of an axiom, and looking up
    that category in the standard location (i.e. in
    :mod:`sage.categories.hopf_algebras` for :class:`HopfAlgebras`,
    and in :mod:`sage.categories.sets_cat` as a special case
    for :class:`Sets`).

    If the heuristic succeeds, the result is guaranteed to be
    correct. Otherwise, an error is raised.

    EXAMPLES::

        sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import base_category_class_and_axiom, CategoryWithAxiom
        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FiniteSets)
        (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Finite')
        sage: Sets.Finite
        <class 'sage.categories.finite_sets.FiniteSets'>
        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(Sets.Finite)
        (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Finite')

        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FiniteDimensionalHopfAlgebrasWithBasis)
        (<class 'sage.categories.hopf_algebras_with_basis.HopfAlgebrasWithBasis'>, 'FiniteDimensional')

        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(HopfAlgebrasWithBasis)
        (<class 'sage.categories.hopf_algebras.HopfAlgebras'>, 'WithBasis')

    Along the way, this does some sanity checks::

        sage: class FacadeSemigroups(CategoryWithAxiom):
        ....:     pass
        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FacadeSemigroups)
        Traceback (most recent call last):
        ...
        AssertionError: Missing (lazy import) link for <class 'sage.categories.semigroups.Semigroups'> to <class '__main__.FacadeSemigroups'> for axiom Facade?

        sage: Semigroups.Facade = FacadeSemigroups
        sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(FacadeSemigroups)
        (<class 'sage.categories.semigroups.Semigroups'>, 'Facade')

    .. NOTE::

        In the following example, we could possibly retrieve ``Sets``
        from the class name. However this cannot be implemented
        robustly until :trac:`9107` is fixed. Anyway this feature
        has not been needed so far::

            sage: Sets.Infinite
            <class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.Infinite'>
            sage: base_category_class_and_axiom(Sets.Infinite)
            Traceback (most recent call last):
            ...
            TypeError: Could not retrieve the base category class and axiom for <class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.Infinite'>.
            ...
    """
    if "." in cls.__name__:
        # Case 1: class name of the form Sets.Infinite
        # Start of implementation when #9107 will be fixed:
        # axiom = cls.__name__.split(".")[-1]
        # ...
        pass
    else:
        # Case 2: class name of the form FiniteSets or AlgebrasWithBasis,
        # with the base class (say Algebras) being implemented in the
        # standard location (sage.categories.algebras)
        name = cls.__name__
        for axiom in all_axioms:
            if axiom == "WithBasis" and name.endswith(axiom):
                base_name = name[:-len(axiom)]
            elif name.startswith(axiom):
                base_name = name[len(axiom):]
            else:
                continue
            if base_name == "Sets": # Special case for Sets which is in sets_cat
                base_module_name = "sets_cat"
            else:
                base_module_name = uncamelcase(base_name, "_")
            try:
                base_module = importlib.import_module("sage.categories."+base_module_name)
                base_category_class = getattr(base_module, base_name)
                assert getattr(base_category_class, axiom, None) is cls, \
                    "Missing (lazy import) link for {} to {} for axiom {}?".format(base_category_class, cls, axiom)
                return base_category_class, axiom
            except (ImportError,AttributeError):
                pass
    raise TypeError("""Could not retrieve the base category class and axiom for {}.
Please specify it explicitly using the attribute _base_category_class_and_axiom.
See CategoryWithAxiom for details.""".format(cls))


@cached_function
def axiom_of_nested_class(cls, nested_cls):
    r"""
    Given a class and a nested axiom class, return the axiom.

    EXAMPLES:

    This uses some heuristics like checking if the nested_cls carries
    the name of the axiom, or is built by appending or prepending the
    name of the axiom to that of the class::

        sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects, axiom_of_nested_class
        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(TestObjects, TestObjects.FiniteDimensional)
        'FiniteDimensional'
        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(TestObjects.FiniteDimensional, TestObjects.FiniteDimensional.Finite)
        'Finite'
        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(Sets, FiniteSets)
        'Finite'
        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(Algebras, AlgebrasWithBasis)
        'WithBasis'

    In all other cases, the nested class should provide an attribute
    ``_base_category_class_and_axiom``::

        sage: Semigroups._base_category_class_and_axiom
        (<class 'sage.categories.magmas.Magmas'>, 'Associative')
        sage: axiom_of_nested_class(Magmas, Semigroups)
        'Associative'
    """
    try:
        axiom = nested_cls.__dict__["_base_category_class_and_axiom"][1]
    except KeyError:
        assert not isinstance(cls, DynamicMetaclass)
        nested_cls_name = nested_cls.__name__.split(".")[-1]
        if nested_cls_name in all_axioms:
            axiom = nested_cls_name
        else:
            cls_name = cls.__name__.split(".")[-1]
            if nested_cls_name.startswith(cls_name):
                axiom = nested_cls_name[len(cls_name):]
            elif nested_cls_name.endswith(cls_name):
                axiom = nested_cls_name[:-len(cls_name)]
            else:
                raise ValueError("could not infer axiom for the nested class {} of {}".format(nested_cls, cls))
    assert axiom in all_axioms, \
        "Incorrect deduction ({}) for the name of the axiom for the nested class {} of {}".format(axiom, nested_cls, cls)
    assert axiom in cls.__dict__ and cls.__dict__[axiom] == nested_cls, \
        "{} not a nested axiom class of {} for axiom {}".format(nested_cls, cls, axiom)
    return axiom

class CategoryWithAxiom(Category):
    r"""
    An abstract class for categories obtained by adding an axiom
    to a base category.

    See the :mod:`category primer <sage.categories.primer>`, and in
    particular its :ref:`section about axioms <category-primer-axioms>`
    for an introduction to axioms, and :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` for
    how to implement axioms and the documentation of the axiom
    infrastructure.

    .. automethod:: __classcall__
    .. automethod:: __classget__
    .. automethod:: __init__
    .. automethod:: _repr_object_names
    .. automethod:: _repr_object_names_static
    .. automethod:: _test_category_with_axiom
    .. automethod:: _without_axioms
    """

    @lazy_class_attribute
    def _base_category_class_and_axiom(cls):
        r"""
        The class of the base category and the axiom for this class.

        By default, and when possible, this attribute is deduced from
        the name of this class (see
        :func:`base_category_class_and_axiom`). For a nested class,
        when the category is first created from its base category as
        in e.g. ``Sets().Infinite()``, this attribute is instead set
        explicitly by :meth:`__classget__`.

        When this is not sufficient, that is when ``cls`` is not
        implemented as a nested class and the base category and the
        axiom cannot be deduced from the name of ``cls``, this
        attribute should be set explicitly by ``cls``.

        The origin of the attribute is stored in the attribute
        ``_base_category_class_and_axiom_origin``.

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`_axiom`

        EXAMPLES:

        ``CommutativeRings`` is not a nested class, but the name of
        the base category and the axiom can be deduced::

            sage: CommutativeRings()._base_category_class_and_axiom
            (<class 'sage.categories.rings.Rings'>, 'Commutative')
            sage: CommutativeRings()._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
            'deduced by base_category_class_and_axiom'

        ``Sets.Infinite`` is a nested class, so the attribute is set
        by :meth:`CategoryWithAxiom.__classget__` the first time
        ``Sets().Infinite()`` is called::

            sage: Sets().Infinite()
            Category of infinite sets
            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom
            (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Infinite')
            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
            'set by __classget__'

        ``Fields`` is not a nested class, and the name of the base
        category and axioms cannot be deduced from the name
        ``Fields``; so this attributes needs to be set explicitly in
        the ``Fields`` class::

            sage: Fields()._base_category_class_and_axiom
            (<class 'sage.categories.division_rings.DivisionRings'>, 'Commutative')
            sage: Fields()._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
            'hardcoded'

        .. NOTE::

            The base category class is often another category with
            axiom, therefore having a special ``__classget__`` method.
            Storing the base category class and the axiom in a single
            tuple attribute -- instead of two separate attributes --
            has the advantage of not trigerring, for example,
            ``Semigroups.__classget__`` upon
            ``Monoids._base_category_class``.
        """
        base_category_class, axiom = base_category_class_and_axiom(cls)
        cls._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin = "deduced by base_category_class_and_axiom"
        return (base_category_class, axiom)

    _base_category_class_and_axiom_origin = "hardcoded"

    @lazy_class_attribute
    def _axiom(cls):
        r"""
        The axiom for this category with axiom.

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`_base_category_class_and_axiom`

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: FiniteSets._axiom
            'Finite'
            sage: Sets.Finite._axiom
            'Finite'
            sage: Algebras.Commutative._axiom
            'Commutative'

        The result can be less obvious::

            sage: Semigroups._axiom
            'Associative'
            sage: Rings._axiom
            'Unital'
            sage: Fields._axiom
            'Commutative'
        """
        return cls._base_category_class_and_axiom[1]

    @staticmethod
    def __classcall__(cls, *args, **options):
        """
        Make ``FoosBar(**)`` an alias for ``Foos(**)._with_axiom("Bar")``.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: FiniteGroups()
            Category of finite groups
            sage: ModulesWithBasis(ZZ)
            Category of modules with basis over Integer Ring
            sage: AlgebrasWithBasis(QQ)
            Category of algebras with basis over Rational Field

        This is relevant when e.g. ``Foos(**)`` does some non trivial
        transformations::

            sage: Modules(QQ) is VectorSpaces(QQ)
            True
            sage: type(Modules(QQ))
            <class 'sage.categories.vector_spaces.VectorSpaces_with_category'>

            sage: ModulesWithBasis(QQ) is VectorSpaces(QQ).WithBasis()
            True
            sage: type(ModulesWithBasis(QQ))
            <class 'sage.categories.vector_spaces.VectorSpaces.WithBasis_with_category'>
        """
        (base_category_class, axiom) = cls._base_category_class_and_axiom
        if len(args) == 1 and not options and isinstance(args[0], base_category_class):
            return super(CategoryWithAxiom, cls).__classcall__(cls, args[0])
        else:
            # The "obvious" idiom
            ##   return cls(base_category_class(*args, **options))
            # fails with ModulesWithBasis(QQ) as follows: The
            # base_category_class is Modules, but Modules(QQ) is an instance
            # of VectorSpaces and not of Modules. Hence,
            # ModulesWithBasis.__classcall__ will not accept this instance as
            # the first argument. Instead, we apply the axiom to the instance:
            return base_category_class(*args, **options)._with_axiom(axiom)

    @staticmethod
    def __classget__(cls, base_category, base_category_class):
        r"""
        Implement the binding behavior for categories with axioms.

        This method implements a binding behavior on category with
        axioms so that, when a category ``Cs`` implements an axiom
        ``A`` with a nested class ``Cs.A``, the expression ``Cs().A``
        evaluates to the method defining the axiom ``A`` and not the
        nested class. See `those design notes
        <category-with-axiom-design>`_ for the rationale behind this
        behavior.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: Sets().Infinite()
            Category of infinite sets
            sage: Sets().Infinite
            Cached version of <function Infinite at ...>
            sage: Sets().Infinite.f == Sets.SubcategoryMethods.Infinite.f
            True

        We check that this also works when the class is implemented in
        a separate file, and lazy imported::

            sage: Sets().Finite
            Cached version of <function Finite at ...>

        There is no binding behavior when accessing ``Finite`` or
        ``Infinite`` from the class of the category instead of the
        category itself::

            sage: Sets.Finite
            <class 'sage.categories.finite_sets.FiniteSets'>
            sage: Sets.Infinite
            <class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets.Infinite'>

        This method also initializes the attribute
        ``_base_category_class_and_axiom`` if not already set::

            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom
            (<class 'sage.categories.sets_cat.Sets'>, 'Infinite')
            sage: Sets.Infinite._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin
            'set by __classget__'
        """
        # TODO: this is super paranoid; see if this can be simplified a bit
        if base_category is not None:
            assert base_category.__class__ is base_category_class
            assert isinstance(base_category_class, DynamicMetaclass)
        if isinstance(base_category_class, DynamicMetaclass):
            base_category_class = base_category_class.__base__
        if "_base_category_class_and_axiom" not in cls.__dict__:
            cls._base_category_class_and_axiom = (base_category_class, axiom_of_nested_class(base_category_class, cls))
            cls._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin = "set by __classget__"
        else:
            assert cls._base_category_class_and_axiom[0] is base_category_class, \
                "base category class for {} mismatch; expected {}, got {}".format(
                 cls, cls._base_category_class_and_axiom[0], base_category_class)

        # Workaround #15648: if Rings.Finite is a LazyImport object,
        # this forces the substitution of the object back into Rings
        # to avoid resolving the lazy import over and over
        if isinstance(base_category_class.__dict__[cls._axiom], LazyImport):
            setattr(base_category_class, cls._axiom, cls)

        if base_category is None:
             return cls
        # For Rings().Finite, this returns the method
        # Sets.SubcategoryMethods.Finite, with its first argument bound to Rings()
        return getattr(super(base_category.__class__.__base__, base_category), cls._axiom)

    def __init__(self, base_category):
        """
        TESTS::

            sage: C = Sets.Finite(); C
            Category of finite sets
            sage: type(C)
            <class 'sage.categories.finite_sets.FiniteSets_with_category'>
            sage: type(C).__base__.__base__
            <class 'sage.categories.category_with_axiom.CategoryWithAxiom_singleton'>

            sage: TestSuite(C).run()
        """
        # A hack to upgrade axiom categories of singleton categories
        # to be singleton categories themselves
        if isinstance(base_category, Category_singleton) and not isinstance(self, CategoryWithAxiom_singleton):
            cls = self.__class__
            assert cls.__base__ == CategoryWithAxiom
            cls.__bases__ = (CategoryWithAxiom_singleton,)+cls.__bases__[1:]

        self._base_category = base_category
        Category.__init__(self)

    def _test_category_with_axiom(self, **options):
        r"""
        Run generic tests on this category with axioms.

        .. SEEALSO:: :class:`TestSuite`.

        This check that an axiom category of a
        :class:`Category_singleton` is a singleton category, and
        similarwise for :class:`Category_over_base_ring`.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: Sets().Finite()._test_category_with_axiom()
            sage: Modules(ZZ).FiniteDimensional()._test_category_with_axiom()
        """
        tester = self._tester(**options)
        base = self.base_category()
        if isinstance(base, Category_singleton):
            tester.assertIsInstance(self, CategoryWithAxiom_singleton)
        if isinstance(base, Category_over_base_ring):
            tester.assertIsInstance(self, CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring)

    def extra_super_categories(self):
        """
        Return the extra super categories of a category with axiom.

        Default implementation which returns ``[]``.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: FiniteSets().extra_super_categories()
            []
        """
        return []

    @cached_method
    def super_categories(self):
        """
        Return a list of the (immediate) super categories of
        ``self``, as per :meth:`Category.super_categories`.

        This implements the property that if ``As`` is a subcategory
        of ``Bs``, then the intersection of ``As`` with ``FiniteSets()``
        is a subcategory of ``As`` and of the intersection of ``Bs``
        with ``FiniteSets()``.

        EXAMPLES:

        A finite magma is both a magma and a finite set::

            sage: Magmas().Finite().super_categories()
            [Category of magmas, Category of finite sets]

        Variants::

            sage: Sets().Finite().super_categories()
            [Category of sets]

            sage: Monoids().Finite().super_categories()
            [Category of monoids, Category of finite semigroups]

        EXAMPLES:

        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects
            sage: C = TestObjects().FiniteDimensional().Unital().Commutative().Finite()
            sage: sorted(C.super_categories(), key=str)
            [Category of finite commutative test objects,
             Category of finite dimensional commutative unital test objects,
             Category of finite finite dimensional test objects]
        """
        base_category = self._base_category
        axiom = self._axiom
        return Category.join((base_category,) +
                             tuple(cat
                                   for category in base_category._super_categories
                                   for cat in category._with_axiom_as_tuple(axiom)) +
                             tuple(self.extra_super_categories()),
                             ignore_axioms = ((base_category, axiom),),
                             as_list = True)

    def additional_structure(self):
        r"""
        Return the additional structure defined by ``self``.

        OUTPUT: ``None``

        By default, a category with axiom defines no additional
        structure.

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category.additional_structure`.

        EXAMPLES:

            sage: Sets().Finite().additional_structure()
            sage: Monoids().additional_structure()

        TESTS::

            sage: Sets().Finite().additional_structure.__module__
            'sage.categories.category_with_axiom'
        """
        return None

    @staticmethod
    def _repr_object_names_static(category, axioms):
        r"""
        INPUT:

        - ``base_category`` -- a category
        - ``axioms`` -- a list or iterable of strings

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import CategoryWithAxiom
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Semigroups(), ["Flying", "Blue"])
            'flying blue semigroups'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Algebras(QQ), ["Flying", "WithBasis", "Blue"])
            'flying blue algebras with basis over Rational Field'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Algebras(QQ), ["WithBasis"])
            'algebras with basis over Rational Field'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Sets().Finite().Subquotients(), ["Finite"])
            'subquotients of finite sets'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Monoids(), ["Unital"])
            'monoids'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Algebras(QQ['x']['y']), ["Flying", "WithBasis", "Blue"])
            'flying blue algebras with basis over Univariate Polynomial Ring in y over Univariate Polynomial Ring in x over Rational Field'

        If the axioms is a set or frozen set, then they are first
        sorted using :func:`canonicalize_axioms`::

            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Semigroups(), set(["Finite", "Commutative", "Facade"]))
            'facade finite commutative semigroups'

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`_repr_object_names`

        .. NOTE::

            The logic here is shared between :meth:`_repr_object_names`
            and :meth:`.category.JoinCategory._repr_object_names`

        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.homsets import Homsets
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Homsets(), ["Endset"])
            'endsets'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(PermutationGroups(), ["FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma"])
            'finitely generated permutation groups'
            sage: CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(Rings(), ["FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma"])
            'finitely generated as magma rings'
        """
        from sage.categories.additive_magmas import AdditiveMagmas
        axioms = canonicalize_axioms(all_axioms,axioms)
        base_category = category._without_axioms(named=True)
        if isinstance(base_category, CategoryWithAxiom): # Smelly runtime type checking
            result = super(CategoryWithAxiom, base_category)._repr_object_names()
        else:
            result = base_category._repr_object_names()
        for axiom in reversed(axioms):
            # TODO: find a more generic way to handle the special cases below
            if axiom in base_category.axioms():
                # If the base category already has this axiom, we
                # need not repeat it here. See the example with
                # Sets().Finite().Subquotients() or Monoids()
                continue
            base_category = base_category._with_axiom(axiom)
            if axiom == "WithBasis":
                result = result.replace(" over ", " with basis over ", 1)
            elif axiom == "Connected" and "graded " in result:
                result = result.replace("graded ", "graded connected ", 1)
            elif axiom == "Connected" and "filtered " in result:
                result = result.replace("filtered ", "filtered connected ", 1)
            elif axiom == "Endset" and "homsets" in result:
                # Without the space at the end to handle Homsets().Endset()
                result = result.replace("homsets", "endsets", 1)
            elif axiom == "FinitelyGeneratedAsMagma" and \
                 not base_category.is_subcategory(AdditiveMagmas()):
                result = "finitely generated " + result
            else:
                result = uncamelcase(axiom) + " " + result
        return result

    def _repr_object_names(self):
        r"""
        The names of the objects of this category, as used by ``_repr_``.

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category._repr_object_names`

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: FiniteSets()._repr_object_names()
            'finite sets'
            sage: AlgebrasWithBasis(QQ).FiniteDimensional()._repr_object_names()
            'finite dimensional algebras with basis over Rational Field'
            sage: Monoids()._repr_object_names()
            'monoids'
            sage: Semigroups().Unital().Finite()._repr_object_names()
            'finite monoids'
            sage: Algebras(QQ).Commutative()._repr_object_names()
            'commutative algebras over Rational Field'

        .. NOTE::

            This is implemented by taking _repr_object_names from
            self._without_axioms(named=True), and adding the names
            of the relevant axioms in appropriate order.
        """
        return CategoryWithAxiom._repr_object_names_static(self, self.axioms())

    def base_category(self):
        r"""
        Return the base category of ``self``.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: C = Sets.Finite(); C
            Category of finite sets
            sage: C.base_category()
            Category of sets
            sage: C._without_axioms()
            Category of sets

        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects, CategoryWithAxiom
            sage: C = TestObjects().Commutative().Facade()
            sage: assert isinstance(C, CategoryWithAxiom)
            sage: C._without_axioms()
            Category of test objects
        """
        return self._base_category

    def __reduce__(self):
        r"""
        Implement the pickle protocol.

        This overides the implementation in
        :meth:`UniqueRepresentation.__reduce__` in order to not
        exposes the implementation detail that, for example, the
        category of magmas which distribute over an associative
        additive magma is implemented as
        ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.Distributive.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative``
        and not
        ``MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.Distributive.AdditiveCommutative.AdditiveAssociative``::

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: C = Semigroups()
            sage: reduction = C.__reduce__(); reduction
            (<function call_method at ...>, (Category of magmas, '_with_axiom', 'Associative'))
            sage: loads(dumps(C)) is C
            True
            sage: FiniteSets().__reduce__()
            (<function call_method at ...>, (Category of sets, '_with_axiom', 'Finite'))

            sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
            sage: C = MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive().AdditiveAssociative().AdditiveCommutative()
            sage: C.__class__
            <class 'sage.categories.distributive_magmas_and_additive_magmas.DistributiveMagmasAndAdditiveMagmas.AdditiveAssociative.AdditiveCommutative_with_category'>
            sage: C.__reduce__()
            (<function call_method at ...>, (Category of additive associative distributive magmas and additive magmas, '_with_axiom', 'AdditiveCommutative'))
        """
        return (call_method, (self._base_category, "_with_axiom", self._axiom))

    @cached_method
    def _without_axiom(self, axiom):
        r"""
        Return this category, with axiom ``axiom`` removed.

        OUTPUT:

        A category ``C`` which does not have axiom ``axiom`` and such
        that either ``C`` is ``self``, or adding back all the axioms
        of ``self`` gives back ``self``.

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category._without_axiom`

        .. WARNING:: This is not guaranteed to be robust.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: Groups()._without_axiom("Unital")
            Category of semigroups
            sage: Groups()._without_axiom("Associative")
            Category of inverse unital magmas
            sage: Groups().Commutative()._without_axiom("Unital")
            Category of commutative semigroups
        """
        axioms = self.axioms().difference([axiom])
        return self._without_axioms()._with_axioms(axioms)

    @cached_method
    def _without_axioms(self, named=False):
        """
        Return the category without the axioms that have been
        added to create it.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: Sets().Finite()._without_axioms()
            Category of sets
            sage: Monoids().Finite()._without_axioms()
            Category of magmas

        This is because::

            sage: Semigroups().Unital() is Monoids()
            True

        If ``named`` is ``True``, then ``_without_axioms`` stops at the
        first category that has an explicit name of its own::

            sage: Sets().Finite()._without_axioms(named=True)
            Category of sets
            sage: Monoids().Finite()._without_axioms(named=True)
            Category of monoids

        Technically we test this by checking if the class specifies
        explicitly the attribute ``_base_category_class_and_axiom``
        by looking up ``_base_category_class_and_axiom_origin``.

        Some more examples::

            sage: Algebras(QQ).Commutative()._without_axioms()
            Category of magmatic algebras over Rational Field
            sage: Algebras(QQ).Commutative()._without_axioms(named=True)
            Category of algebras over Rational Field
        """
        if named and self._base_category_class_and_axiom_origin == "hardcoded":
            return self
        return self._base_category._without_axioms(named=named)

    @cached_method
    def axioms(self):
        r"""
        Return the axioms known to be satisfied by all the
        objects of ``self``.

        .. SEEALSO:: :meth:`Category.axioms`

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: C = Sets.Finite(); C
            Category of finite sets
            sage: C.axioms()
            frozenset({'Finite'})

            sage: C = Modules(GF(5)).FiniteDimensional(); C
            Category of finite dimensional vector spaces over Finite Field of size 5
            sage: sorted(C.axioms())
            ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
             'AdditiveUnital', 'Finite', 'FiniteDimensional']

            sage: sorted(FiniteMonoids().Algebras(QQ).axioms())
            ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
             'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Distributive',
             'FiniteDimensional', 'Unital', 'WithBasis']
            sage: sorted(FiniteMonoids().Algebras(GF(3)).axioms())
            ['AdditiveAssociative', 'AdditiveCommutative', 'AdditiveInverse',
             'AdditiveUnital', 'Associative', 'Distributive', 'Finite',
             'FiniteDimensional', 'Unital', 'WithBasis']

            sage: from sage.categories.magmas_and_additive_magmas import MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas
            sage: MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive().Unital().axioms()
            frozenset({'Distributive', 'Unital'})

            sage: D = MagmasAndAdditiveMagmas().Distributive()
            sage: X = D.AdditiveAssociative().AdditiveCommutative().Associative()
            sage: X.Unital().super_categories()[1]
            Category of monoids
            sage: X.Unital().super_categories()[1] is Monoids()
            True
        """
        # We would want to write the following line:
        #     return super(CategoryWithAxiom, self).axioms() | {self._axiom}
        # However one currently can't use super to call a cached
        # method in a super class. So we dup the code from there ...
        return frozenset(axiom
                         for category in self._super_categories
                         for axiom in category.axioms()) | {self._axiom}

class CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring(CategoryWithAxiom, Category_over_base_ring):

    def __init__(self, base_category):
        """
        TESTS::

            sage: C = Modules(ZZ).FiniteDimensional(); C
            Category of finite dimensional modules over Integer Ring
            sage: type(C)
            <class 'sage.categories.modules.Modules.FiniteDimensional_with_category'>
            sage: type(C).__base__.__base__
            <class 'sage.categories.category_with_axiom.CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring'>

            sage: TestSuite(C).run()
        """
        # FIXME: this basically duplicates the code from
        # CategoryWithAxiom.__init__; but we can't call the latter without
        # calling Category.__init__ twice. One could instead set
        # "self.__base", which is done in Category_over_base_ring.__init__,
        # but then one has to take into account Python's name mangling.
        self._base_category = base_category
        Category_over_base_ring.__init__(self, base_category.base_ring())

class CategoryWithAxiom_singleton(Category_singleton, CategoryWithAxiom):#, Category_singleton, FastHashable_class):
    pass

"""
The following workaround is needed until any :class:`CategoryWithAxiom` of a
:class:`Category_over_base_ring` becomes automatically a
:class:`CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring`::

    sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjectsOverBaseRing, Category_over_base_ring
    sage: from sage.categories.category import JoinCategory
    sage: isinstance(TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ), Category_over_base_ring)
    True
    sage: C = TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ).Commutative()
    sage: isinstance(C, Category_over_base_ring)          # todo: not implemented
    True
    sage: C.FiniteDimensional()
    Category of finite dimensional commutative test objects over base ring over Rational Field
    sage: C.Commutative()
    Category of commutative test objects over base ring over Rational Field
    sage: C.Unital()
    Category of commutative unital test objects over base ring over Rational Field

    sage: C = TestObjectsOverBaseRing(IntegerModRing(2)).Connected()
    sage: isinstance(C, JoinCategory)
    True
    sage: isinstance(C, Category_over_base_ring)          # todo: not implemented
    True
    sage: C.FiniteDimensional()
    Category of finite dimensional connected test objects over base ring over Ring of integers modulo 2
    sage: C.Connected()
    Category of connected test objects over base ring over Ring of integers modulo 2
"""

##############################################################################
# Utilities and tests tools

def axiom(axiom):
    """
    Return a function/method ``self -> self._with_axiom(axiom)``.

    This can used as a shorthand to define axioms, in particular in
    the tests below. Usually one will want to attach documentation to
    an axiom, so the need for such a shorthand in real life might not
    be that clear, unless we start creating lots of axioms.

    In the long run maybe this could evolve into an ``@axiom`` decorator.

    EXAMPLES::

        sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import axiom
        sage: axiom("Finite")(Semigroups())
        Category of finite semigroups

    Upon assigning the result to a class this becomes a method::

        sage: class As:
        ....:     def _with_axiom(self, axiom): return self, axiom
        ....:     Finite = axiom("Finite")
        sage: As().Finite()
        (<__main__.As instance at ...>, 'Finite')
    """
    def with_axiom(self):
        return self._with_axiom(axiom)
    with_axiom.__name__ = axiom
    return with_axiom

class Blahs(Category_singleton):
    r"""
    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.

    This is the root of a hierarchy of mathematically meaningless
    categories, used for testing Sage's category framework:

    - :class:`Bars`
    - :class:`TestObjects`
    - :class:`TestObjectsOverBaseRing`
    """

    def super_categories(self):
        """
        TESTS::

             sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Blahs
             sage: Blahs().super_categories()
             [Category of sets]
             sage: TestSuite(Blahs()).run()
        """
        from sage.categories.sets_cat import Sets
        return [Sets()]

    class SubcategoryMethods:
        FiniteDimensional = axiom("FiniteDimensional")
        Commutative       = axiom("Commutative")
        Unital            = axiom("Unital")
        Connected         = axiom("Connected")
        Flying            = axiom("Flying")
        Blue              = axiom("Blue")

    class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom):
        pass
    class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom):
        pass
    class Connected(CategoryWithAxiom):
        pass
    class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom):
        class Blue(CategoryWithAxiom):
            pass
    class Flying(CategoryWithAxiom):
        def extra_super_categories(self):
            """
            This illustrates a way to have an axiom imply another one.

            Here, we want ``Flying`` to imply ``Unital``, and to put
            the class for the category of unital flying blahs in
            ``Blahs.Flying`` rather than ``Blahs.Unital.Flying``.

            TESTS::

                sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Blahs, TestObjects, Bars
                sage: Blahs().Flying().extra_super_categories()
                [Category of unital blahs]
                sage: Blahs().Flying()
                Category of flying unital blahs
            """
            return [Blahs().Unital()]

    def Blue_extra_super_categories(self):
        """
        Illustrates a current limitation in the way to have an axiom
        imply another one.

        Here, we would want ``Blue`` to imply ``Unital``, and to put
        the class for the category of unital blue blahs in
        ``Blahs.Unital.Blue`` rather than ``Blahs.Blue``.

        This currently fails because ``Blahs`` is the category where
        the axiom ``Blue`` is defined, and the specifications
        currently impose that a category defining an axiom should also
        implement it (here in an category with axiom
        ``Blahs.Blue``). In practice, due to this violation of the
        specifications, the axiom is lost during the join calculation.

        .. TODO::

            Decide whether we care about this feature. In such a
            situation, we are not really defining a new axiom, but
            just defining an axiom as an alias for a couple others,
            which might not be that useful.

        .. TODO::

            Improve the infrastructure to detect and report this
            violation of the specifications, if this is
            easy. Otherwise, it's not so bad: when defining an axiom A
            in a category ``Cs`` the first thing one is supposed to
            doctest is that ``Cs().A()`` works. So the problem should
            not go unnoticed.

        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Blahs, TestObjects, Bars
            sage: Blahs().Blue_extra_super_categories()
            [Category of unital blahs]
            sage: Blahs().Blue()                          # todo: not implemented
            Category of blue unital blahs
        """
        return [Blahs().Unital()]

class Bars(Category_singleton):
    r"""
    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.

    .. SEEALSO:: :class:`Blahs`
    """

    def super_categories(self):
        """
        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Bars
            sage: Bars().super_categories()
            [Category of blahs]
            sage: TestSuite(Bars()).run()
        """
        return [Blahs()]

    def Unital_extra_super_categories(self):
        """
        Return extraneous super categories for the unital objects of ``self``.

        This method specifies that a unital bar is a test object.
        Thus, the categories of unital bars and of unital test objects
        coincide.

        EXAMPLES::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import Bars, TestObjects
            sage: Bars().Unital_extra_super_categories()
            [Category of test objects]
            sage: Bars().Unital()
            Category of unital test objects
            sage: TestObjects().Unital().all_super_categories()
            [Category of unital test objects,
             Category of unital blahs,
             Category of test objects,
             Category of bars,
             Category of blahs,
             Category of sets,
             Category of sets with partial maps,
             Category of objects]
        """
        return [TestObjects()]

class TestObjects(Category_singleton):
    r"""
    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.

    .. SEEALSO:: :class:`Blahs`
    """

    def super_categories(self):
        """
        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjects
            sage: TestObjects().super_categories()
            [Category of bars]
            sage: TestSuite(TestObjects()).run()
        """
        return [Bars()]

    class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom):
         class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom):
              pass
         class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom):
              class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom):
                   pass

    class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom):
         class Facade(CategoryWithAxiom):
             pass
         class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom):
             pass
         class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom):
             pass

    class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom):
        pass

class TestObjectsOverBaseRing(Category_over_base_ring):
    r"""
    A toy singleton category, for testing purposes.

    .. SEEALSO:: :class:`Blahs`
    """

    def super_categories(self):
        """
        TESTS::

            sage: from sage.categories.category_with_axiom import TestObjectsOverBaseRing
            sage: TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ).super_categories()
            [Category of test objects]
            sage: TestObjectsOverBaseRing.Unital.an_instance()
            Category of unital test objects over base ring over Rational Field
            sage: TestObjectsOverBaseRing.FiniteDimensional.Unital.an_instance()
            Category of finite dimensional unital test objects over base ring over Rational Field
            sage: TestSuite(TestObjectsOverBaseRing(QQ).FiniteDimensional().Unital().Commutative()).run()
        """
        return [TestObjects()]

    class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
         class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
              pass
         class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
              class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
                   pass

    class Commutative(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
         class Facade(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
             pass
         class FiniteDimensional(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
             pass
         class Finite(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
             pass

    class Unital(CategoryWithAxiom_over_base_ring):
        pass

