#20154: train-tracks
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: dbenielli | Owner:
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-7.1
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: free-group automorphism | Merged in:
Authors: Dominique Benielli and | Reviewers:
Thierry Coulbois | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by coulbois):
Yes of course we can also adapt the existing FreeGroup to my code. For
that I need to know how much it is used. In particular as it seems to be
only a wrapper of GAP.
Apparently there are two different approaches:
1/ The present FreeGroup (from GAP) focuses on the fact that free groups
are algebraic objects (they have generators and the elements are somehow
abstract group elements)
2/ Whereas my approach is closer to that of Words: free group are
combinatorial objects and their elements are words on an alphabet.
I don't know how much these two approaches are compatible. And how much we
can merge or converge to a common approach. The differences are probably
similar to that between FreeMonoid and Words.
Marco can you tell us how much your FreeGroup is used, how much it is
important that its elements are from a GAP wrap class (ElementLibGAP) ?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20154#comment:12>
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.
