#19399: let category of growth group be determined by input
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: dkrenn | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_info
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.10
Component: asymptotic | Resolution:
expansions | Merged in:
Keywords: | Reviewers: Clemens Heuberger
Authors: Daniel Krenn | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 7338a050ea9f7c901bcf293afb6e2a033bf608e6
u/cheuberg/t/19399 | Stopgaps:
Dependencies: #19083 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by cheuberg):
* status: needs_review => needs_info
* reviewer: => Clemens Heuberger
* commit: 8840f1e106ddc4332316fc1a79ca667e16f14a54 =>
7338a050ea9f7c901bcf293afb6e2a033bf608e6
Comment:
I added a rather stupid doctest: `x^W` where `W = Words([0, 1])`. The
resulting growth group turns out to be a monoid; however, `W` itself is
not a monoid. (As a side note, even finite words are not declared to be a
monoid). I am not sure whether we should check that.
Apart from that: Shouldn't we check for commutativity of the base and
return `Monoids().Commutative()` instead?
The rest seems to be fine; I do not understand why there was a failure on
a patchbot.
----
New commits:
||[http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/commit/?id=7338a050ea9f7c901bcf293afb6e2a033bf608e6
7338a05]||{{{Trac #19399: Add doctest}}}||
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19399#comment:8>
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/d/optout.
