#20027: Different behavior for reflections for matrix Coxeter group and Weyl
groups
-----------------------------------------------+---------------------------
Reporter: tscrim | Owner: sage-
Type: defect | combinat
Priority: major | Status: new
Component: combinatorics | Milestone: sage-7.1
Keywords: coxeter groups, reflections | Resolution:
Authors: | Merged in:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Branch: | Work issues:
Dependencies: | Commit:
| Stopgaps:
-----------------------------------------------+---------------------------
Comment (by nthiery):
Replying to [comment:4 tscrim]:
> With that being said, in many ways I feel that it is more natural for
the family to be indexed by the roots and the values be reflections. It
means we can just do `for x in W.reflections()` as I don't think of roots
as ''being'' reflection (instead of corresponding to).
>
> I would return a family with the keys being roots and values being
reflections. Since iteration over a family is iteration over the values,
this will be consistent with complex reflection groups returning a tuple
(taking advantage of ducktyping). At least, I don't think of reflections
having a natural total ordering, so you should only be iterating over all
them.
+1
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20027#comment:6>
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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
