On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Jason B Hill wrote:
>
> Sorry, I was in the mountains for a bit and missed some conversation.
>
> Mike H: Do you want any assistance in your current task?
I have two patches up on the combinat patch server which add domains
to permutation groups.
The first is
htt
Sorry, I was in the mountains for a bit and missed some conversation.
Mike H: Do you want any assistance in your current task?
Robert B: In response to your question after my last e-mail, assuming I
understand it correctly, I am under the assumption that only points declared
explicitly in the gen
On May 31, 2010, at 3:06 PM, William Laffin wrote:
I've brought this one up before. How do folks feel about having the
named permutation groups available like graphs are? In other words,
rather than each family of permutation groups being a new class,
there
is a single system-wide object ("
>> I've brought this one up before. How do folks feel about having the
>> named permutation groups available like graphs are? In other words,
>> rather than each family of permutation groups being a new class, there
>> is a single system-wide object ("groups", or "perm_groups") whose
>> methods p
On May 30, 2010, at 4:46 PM, Rob Beezer wrote:
On May 30, 2:46 pm, Mike Hansen wrote:
I've been working on this over the next few days, cleaning up the
code, and making permutation groups act over an "arbitrary" domain.
I'll be posting these in the next few days.
Mike H - thanks for your wor
On May 30, 2010, at 3:33 PM, Jason B Hill wrote:
Sweet!
I'm assuming you're using a dictionary map? I think this could kill
two birds with one stone. If we want to make Sage act more like GAP
and consider the domain of a permutation group to be the collection
of non-fixed points
To cla
On May 30, 2:46 pm, Mike Hansen wrote:
> I've been working on this over the next few days, cleaning up the
> code, and making permutation groups act over an "arbitrary" domain.
> I'll be posting these in the next few days.
Mike H - thanks for your work on this!
Mike O'S - that's a great wish lis
Sweet!
I'm assuming you're using a dictionary map? I think this could kill two
birds with one stone. If we want to make Sage act more like GAP and consider
the domain of a permutation group to be the collection of non-fixed points
(I think we should consider subgroups separately), then even in the
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Jason B Hill wrote:
> Can we get a list together of all of those who may be interested in
> contributing to the rewrite of permutation groups on some level? We can move
> to an in-depth discussion and inventory. I don't want to flood the
> sage-devel list with too
>
> Besides the usual suspects (who I hope are interested as well, you
> know who you are!), Mike O'Sullivan and his students at San Diego
> State might also be interested.
>
> Rob
Yes, indeed, we are very interested. Our primary interest is
classroom use, rather
than research. Some of the of th
please keep me in the loop.
Thanks,
Dima
On May 22, 4:51 am, Rob Beezer wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> That all sounds great, I am available for a summertime push on
> permutation groups as it will fit nicely with some other plans I have.
>
> Over on the centralizer thread, I think David Joyner volunteer
Hi Jason,
That all sounds great, I am available for a summertime push on
permutation groups as it will fit nicely with some other plans I have.
Over on the centralizer thread, I think David Joyner volunteered me as
"leader." I don't think I want to go that far, in particular because
I don't know
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Rob Beezer wrote:
> Abelian groups is second on my list (right after graphs + latex), but
> as I've been told, "many have failed here." So I'd get out of the way
> (or help) if anybody else is interested.
>
> And I have a vested interest in permutation groups
On May 20, 5:13 pm, kcrisman wrote:
> On May 20, 4:33 pm, Rob Beezer wrote:
>
>
>
> > Abelian groups is second on my list (right after graphs + latex), but
> > as I've been told, "many have failed here." So I'd get out of the way
> > (or help) if anybody else is interested.
>
> > And I have a
On May 20, 4:33 pm, Rob Beezer wrote:
> Abelian groups is second on my list (right after graphs + latex), but
> as I've been told, "many have failed here." So I'd get out of the way
> (or help) if anybody else is interested.
>
> And I have a vested interest in permutation groups..
>
> Rob
>
Abelian groups is second on my list (right after graphs + latex), but
as I've been told, "many have failed here." So I'd get out of the way
(or help) if anybody else is interested.
And I have a vested interest in permutation groups..
Rob
On May 20, 1:18 pm, William Stein wrote:
> Let's rew
Let's rewrite:
* abelian groups
* permutations groups
* piecewise functions
* Sage's riemann_roch_basis command (wrapping Brill-Noether)...
William
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> Indeed, somehow people who wrote the permutation groups code in Sage
> kept forge
Indeed, somehow people who wrote the permutation groups code in Sage
kept forgetting that
a permutation group is a pair (G,X), where G is a group and X is a
set, on which G acts.
Once you think that you can get away with permutations alone, you are
doomed...
(same would apply to any group actions,
There's a problem with centralizers of permutation groups that sounds
like either (a) it is related, or (b) might not have happened if there
had been more care about just waht the symbol set was for a
permutation group. I posted it separately so it would be easy to find
in the archives, and thinki
Most of this discussion is about cases where sage thinks it is acting on
a bigger set than the user wants it to. I'll just point out bug 8963
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8963
where sage has the reverse problem: it thinks that the set that is
being acted on is smaller. For exam
20 matches
Mail list logo
