Big +1 to framework for explicitly instantiating group actions.
--
Benjamin Jones
benjaminfjo...@gmail.com
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 11:01 PM, tom d wrote:
> Specify the action! By making a group action framework, we would also be
> providing the possibility of changing the action to something
oops, here's the code! I keep getting server erros when trying to attach
as a file, so I'm just including the text of the code file below:
class GroupAction(Parent):
def __init__(self, G, S, phi):
#phi a group action G\times S \rightarrow S
self.phi=phi
self.G=G
Specify the action! By making a group action framework, we would also be
providing the possibility of changing the action to something contrary to
the assumptions of the original developers Yes, in fact I think this is
one of the natural reasons for doing an explicit group action framework.
Le 10/03/2013 01:40, Montgomery-Smith, Stephen a écrit :
Building on FreeBSD, the doc creation process freezes after this point:
[history_a] loading pickled environment... not yet created
[history_a] building [inventory]: targets for 1 source files that are
out of date
[history_a] updating envir
Le 25/03/2013 17:56, Julien Puydt a écrit :
Let's play with the libgap spkg!
It compiled well, but didn't fix the issue.
Snark on #sagemath
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving email
Le 25/03/2013 17:18, leif a écrit :
Julien Puydt wrote:
Hi,
I'm making experiments building sage with a mix of spkg / system
packages ; things are starting to take shape, and I'm now able to finish
the 'build' step.
For the 'doc' step, I get a strange behaviour : the doc seems to build
correct
Julien Puydt wrote:
Hi,
I'm making experiments building sage with a mix of spkg / system
packages ; things are starting to take shape, and I'm now able to finish
the 'build' step.
For the 'doc' step, I get a strange behaviour : the doc seems to build
correctly, but then at some point, it tells
On 03/25/2013 12:27 AM, Xavier Caruso wrote:
Le dimanche 24 mars 2013, Jeroen Demeyer a écrit :
Also: are you aware of http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12555
because your patches should be applied on top of that.
I was aware about this ticket but I didn't know that it was positively
r
Hi,
I'm making experiments building sage with a mix of spkg / system
packages ; things are starting to take shape, and I'm now able to finish
the 'build' step.
For the 'doc' step, I get a strange behaviour : the doc seems to build
correctly, but then at some point, it tells me the build was
On Monday, March 25, 2013 9:06:56 AM UTC-4, Volker Braun wrote:
>
> Functions that are not imported into the global namespace are by
> definition implementation details and don't have to be deprecated if you
> change/remove them.
>
>
>>
That's not always true; there are certainly things that ha
In a current project I have to compute quite a lot of monomial
expressions of the form X^i*Y^j*Z^k where i+j+k=39 and X,Y,Z are power
series in one variable over a cubic number field. This takes a *very*
long time once the coefficients of the intermediate expressions get
large. (I tried to optimi
Functions that are not imported into the global namespace are by definition
implementation details and don't have to be deprecated if you change/remove
them.
On Monday, March 25, 2013 2:00:21 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote:
>
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14355
>
>
--
You receive
Hellooo everybody !
There's in sage.combinat a module that I hope nobody around uses. Here it
is :
http://www.sagemath.org/doc/reference/combinat/sage/combinat/generator.html
Vincent noticed in #10534 that itertools was more standard and provided the
same features, and that keeping this in S
The group action category stuff would be nice, but you would run into
exactly the same question that Dima asked: What are you going to do if
there is more than one possible action. You'll have to either use some
heuristics (take the simpler / less nested action) or raise some exception
telling
Nice catch Dima!
This functionality is nice, although I think a competent programmer in
Sage/Python realizes that the object (1,2) is a bit too vague/polymorphic.
It DOES have a use in at least helping explain the theory though. The
following example is a small demonstration. I'm simply using text
Le dimanche 24 mars 2013, David Roe a écrit :
> Sage Days 47 is this upcoming week, working on transitioning Sage to
> git.
> Julian and I are currently using a github repository to collaborate
> on p-adics in Sage (https://github.com/saraedum/sage/tree/Zq). We'd
> be happy to give you permissi
Hm, wouldn't this just be a direct product of the individual group
actions? It seems to me that we're expecting the permutations to act
according to an 'obvious' group action. Should we also expect 'obvious'
actions of things like a dihedral group when given a 2-dimensional vector?
Probably
17 matches
Mail list logo
