Dear David, > This might be an issue of over-riding the exponentiation of an integer. > I guess it could be implemented, at a cost of slowing down the much more > common computation of exponentiation on ZZ.
O.K., I think it would also be fine to have 3*sigma instead of 3^sigma for an element sigma in a permutation group. What I find pretty irritating is what you get from help(PermutationGroupElement): This help page does *not* explain how to apply sigma to an element of the set where the group is acting on, but it *does* explain how to apply sigma to a multivariate polynomial! Funny enough, this works via f*sigma, so we have the appropriate notation for the right action. > sage: a.orbit(1)[1] > Well, sigma.orbit(x)[1] is probably a clumsy substitute for the working sigma(x) or the not implemented x^sigma or x*sigma ... > > The thematic tutorial `Group Theory and Sage' looks particularly odd: It > > starts with number theory which has nothing to do with what I would > expect > > under this heading. The second part then contains no material at all > about > > how to create and work with self-made permutation groups. > > I'm not sure what you mean. That paper starts with the basic interface > then > moves to abelian groups. Do you mean that abelian groups should not > be covered in a paper titled "Group theory and Sage"? I'm talking about the *Thematic Tutorial *`Group Theory and Sage', not about the section `Finite Groups, Abelian Groups' of the *Sage Tutorial.* * * -- Peter Mueller -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.
