On 2013-03-21, Benjamin Jones <benjaminfjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> --f46d0444e849ed15b904d871801a
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> It seems to me that the ambiguity arises from the original statement, "the
> orbit (1,2) under G", not the fact that the domain is non-homogeneous. It's
> less ambiguous to say directly G.{1, 2} (the orbit of the _element_ {1, 2})
> versus G.1 \union G.2 (the orbit of the subset {1, 2}). Then, which group
> action you are talking about is clear.
>
> For the API, it seems best (to me) to have the standard orbit function
> (which takes an element of the domain and returns its orbit) and add to
> that an optional parameter which changes the semantics to orbits of sets.
in my example, {1,2} (the domain element) is naturally a subset of the domain,
so in both
cases it's an orbit on subsets. The trouble is that it's not
well-defined for a domain like this.
> The user would have to supply a subset of the domain then, instead of an
> element or you'd raise a TypeError.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
