#15456: fix bug in has_right/left_descents in Weyl group code
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
zabrocki | Status: needs_review
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.2
defect | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers:
combinatorics | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | 549f238c87e446116457d645c2b0171b423c02df
Frédéric Chapoton | Stopgaps:
Report Upstream: N/A |
Branch: |
u/chapoton/15456 |
Dependencies: |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment (by tscrim):
Hey Tom,
If we made both left/right `@abstract_method`'s, then we would have to
implement all methods. If we made them optional, I feel that we'd get bug
reports about these not being implemented. The problem is that
`has_descent()` wasn't being brought into the loop, so if that was the
only thing implemented, then one couldn't use `has_left_descent()` as
expects. Thus [comment:4 the spec]:
>* at least one of has_descent / has_right_descent / has_left_descent
should be implemented
would be satisfied in my proposal.
Although I think we could do a modified version of your proposal 1) by
implementing some kind of modification to `@abstract_method`. Something
like
{{{
@abstract_method(circular=['foo', 'bar'])
}}}
where if `foo` and `bar` were also called, then error out.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15456#comment:13>
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.
