> We can possibly have a function > > def cayley_graph(set, generators, operator)
Yeah yeah, that's what Travis proposed I guess. I just wondered if there was some special trick to handle these things, as I expect that it is not the first time some code has to be written twice for + and for *. Doing it manually with a third function works of course, though it means (2+1)=3 functions for one feature. Anyaway. The only thing that still troubles me is this .cayley_graph() + .additive_cayley_graph(). The naming is terrible. I've fought "review wars" for the tenth of that. Nathann -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
