#14319: Automorphism group with labeled vertices
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: ncohen | Owner: jason,
Type: enhancement | ncohen, rlm
Priority: major | Status: closed
Component: graph theory | Milestone: sage-5.10
Keywords: | Resolution: fixed
Authors: Nathann Cohen | Merged in:
Report Upstream: N/A | sage-5.10.beta2
Branch: | Reviewers: Volker
Dependencies: #14291, #14250, #14477, | Braun
#14435 | Work issues:
| Commit:
| Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
Oh. I see. Well, `p.parent().domain()` probably makes more sense indeed.
Then I would vote for removing `.domain()` too. My point is that you
cannot give a meaning to `.list()` unless for "the subset of groups that
are of personal interest to you" (i.e. those that act on integers) and for
this reason I do not think this function should exist. I mean, of course
you can define "list" but you cannot define what is of interest to you,
i.e. that the output of `.list()` defines the permutation itself. This
only works when all elements are integers, and there already is a class
for that, i.e. permutations.
How are `p.parent().domain()` and `p.domain()` different ? If it is only
the order, there is nothing wrong in that. Those things are morally
"sets", and only returned as tuples/lists for efficiency reasons I guess.
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14319#comment:58>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
