On 2014-09-06, Nathann Cohen <nathann.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yo ! > >> sage: Permutation([1,2,3]) >> > [1, 2, 3] >> > sage: Permutation((1,2,3)) >> > [2, 3, 1] >> >> this actually makes perfect sense for someone with some >> group theory background. >> (array notation vs cyclic notation) >> > > I will repeat it for as long as people will ignore it, but NO it does not > make sense. You define a permutation with a collection of disjoint cycles, > not with one cycle alone.
OK, sorry, perhaps, I am too used to GAP, which allows things like a:=(1,2)(3,4); b:=(3,4,5); Yes, I must agree that in Pythonic world sage: Permutation((1,2,3)) must be equal to sage: Permutation([1,2,3]) And if you mean the cyclic permutation (1,2,3) this should be sage: Permutation([(1,2,3)]) Dima -- 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.
