On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 10:47:58PM +0800, R.E. Boss wrote: > Thanks. > I should have consulted the manual first. > > Still think it is strange that StructureDescription does not determine the > group up to isomorphism.
The main reason is that it's quite nontrivial to describe extensions in a non-verbose way. One would need to use the language of group cohomology, etc. Already conventions like Q_8 for a particular non-split extension of C_4 by C_2 (or of C_2 by C_2xC_2) are a compromise. HTH, Dmitrii CONFIDENTIALITY:This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete it,notify us and do not copy,use,or disclose its content. Towards A Sustainable Earth:Print Only When Necessary.Thank you. _______________________________________________ Forum mailing list Forum@mail.gap-system.org http://mail.gap-system.org/mailman/listinfo/forum
