Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Okay, thanks to this vector trick I was able to do what I wanted. Do you believe that the syntax should be changed so that A(vector(whatever)) has the same result as A(whatever) ? vector does not add a very meaningful information here ... Nathann -- You received this message because you are

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On 28 April 2014 09:48, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: Okay, thanks to this vector trick I was able to do what I wanted. Do you believe that the syntax should be changed so that A(vector(whatever)) has the same result as A(whatever) ? vector does not add a very meaningful

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

I think that the point is to allow creation of elements either with respect to the input generators (using vector) or with respect to the simplified generators (without vector). Since both sort of input look the same (tuples / lists) I am guessing that the trick of using vector is just

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On Monday, April 28, 2014 11:11:45 AM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: I think that the point is to allow creation of elements either with respect to the input generators (using vector) or with respect to the simplified generators (without vector). Since both sort of input look the same

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Thats it. The syntax is awful, do we agree on that ? -1, some method returns an abelian group and you don't know how it was constructed without having to dig around. ? But when I create a group by myself which I want to be equal to Z/2Z * Z/3Z I end up with something different, isn't that a

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On Monday, April 28, 2014 11:18:09 AM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: Thats it. The syntax is awful, do we agree on that ? Its always going to be somewhat confusing to have both the original definition and a canonical form around. Feel free to add more descriptive construction methods for

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Its always going to be somewhat confusing to have both the original definition and a canonical form around. Feel free to add more descriptive construction methods for elements. The ctor argument convention is because that was chosen originally and I didn't want to break code when refactoring

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

I don't think that will work if you are relying on the error message to indicate the wrong length of input. For example: sage: AdditiveAbelianGroup([6,2]) Additive abelian group isomorphic to Z/2 + Z/6 Now you will expect the element (1,0) to have order 6 but it has order 2. John On 28 April

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

I don't think that will work if you are relying on the error message to indicate the wrong length of input. For example: sage: AdditiveAbelianGroup([6,2]) Additive abelian group isomorphic to Z/2 + Z/6 Now you will expect the element (1,0) to have order 6 but it has order 2. No, this

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On Monday, April 28, 2014 2:09:55 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: What do you think the implications of the following changes would be ? [...] I would think that this is incompatible with the current syntax. If anything, we should add a G.linear_combination_of_gens in addition to the

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

I would think that this is incompatible with the current syntax. Yes of course, that changes the default ! But I am not so sure that it would break many things, as the current implementation is so unreliable that you cannot guess what G accepts as input, unless you made sure to define it with a

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On Monday, April 28, 2014 2:59:05 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: I would think that this is incompatible with the current syntax. Yes of course, that changes the default Hence it can break code that people have written privately. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Hence it can break code that people have written privately. I believe that not so many have written such code, for the very same reason. But indeed if we change that we will need a deprecation step. Don't you agree that this change would make sense ? I just did the change I mentionned above,

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

The default repr is in terms of smith form gens, so IMHO it makes more sense to default to a linear combination of smith form gens. Imagine some method returns an abelian group, how are you going to construct elements? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

The default repr is in terms of smith form gens, so IMHO it makes more sense to default to a linear combination of smith form gens. Imagine some method returns an abelian group, how are you going to construct elements? Well, obviously by changing repr, no ? O_o Nathann -- You received this

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

I mean ... Really, nobody cares what the smith form generators are. It's a technical problem, the user does not even have to be aware of that ! Nathann On 28 April 2014 17:19, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: The default repr is in terms of smith form gens, so IMHO it makes more

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On Monday, April 28, 2014 4:06:36 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: I believe that not so many have written such code, for the very same reason. But indeed if we change that we will need a deprecation step. Moreover, how are you going to deprecate it? When is a deprecation warning shown? --

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Moreover, how are you going to deprecate it? When is a deprecation warning shown? Ahahahah. That's an interesting question, but the current way being bad, there is absolutely no way that it will stay like that forever just because we don't know how to tell the users :-D I had something a bit

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

To be honest, I would prefer to do the opposite. Changing it now while printing a message saying that the format changed, and removing the message one year from now. Nathann On 28 April 2014 17:27, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: Moreover, how are you going to deprecate it? When

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Here's something I find really confusing about additive abelian groups: sage: H = AdditiveAbelianGroup([0,2]) sage: H((2,0)) (0, 0) sage: H(vector((2,0))) (2, 0) sage: H((1,0)).order() 2 sage: H(vector((1,0))).order() +Infinity This is terrible, and a symptom of what Nathann wants to fix. It

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Showing a deprecation warning for valid input isn't ideal ;-) Indeed, indeed. Right now it prints the following input, which I hope will be taken seriously by those who should, and be ignored by those who should : sage: x = A([5]); x doctest:1: DeprecationWarning: The default behaviour changed

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Hello guys ! I just created ticket #16261 about this and uploaded my branch. It's funny that to make all tests pass I only had to add four linear_combination_of_smith_form_gens... Now the problem is that I have no idea how to change .short_name() (which is called by __repr__), as I have no idea

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Showing a deprecation warning for valid input isn't ideal ;-) How about we deprecate all list/tuple input and force the user to use G.linear_combination_of_smith_form_gens / G.linear_combination_of_gens. On Monday, April 28, 2014 4:27:45 PM UTC+1, Nathann Cohen wrote: Moreover, how are

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Ahahaah. While writing that code, I met an infinite loop. Apparently testing if an element of a group is equal to +infinity calls __repr__... :-P Nathann On 28 April 2014 18:16, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: Showing a deprecation warning for valid input isn't ideal ;-) Indeed,

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

The current branch passes all tests in groups/ and modules/fg_pid/ :-) Needs review ! Nathann On 28 April 2014 18:29, Nathann Cohen nathann.co...@gmail.com wrote: Ahahaah. While writing that code, I met an infinite loop. Apparently testing if an element of a group is equal to +infinity calls

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

On Monday, April 28, 2014 9:14:17 AM UTC-7, Volker Braun wrote: Showing a deprecation warning for valid input isn't ideal ;-) How about we deprecate all list/tuple input and force the user to use G.linear_combination_of_smith_form_gens / G.linear_combination_of_gens. list input is actually

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Hello again ! This time the branch passes all long tests in src/ except one, and I need your advice. Here is the problem : ** File chain_complex.py, line 738, in sage.homology.chain_complex.ChainComplex_class.grading_group

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

Turns out that I am an idiot, and that the warning is triggered by the degree=G([1,2]) part of the expression I had overlooked. The branch now passes all tests, and is in needs_review. The only thing that needs to be discussed is this warning problem, and whether we should create a new function

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

sage: A = AdditiveAbelianGroup([2,2,2,3], remember_generators=True) sage: A.gens() ((1, 0, 0, 0), (0, 1, 0, 0), (0, 0, 1, 0), (0, 0, 0, 1)) sage: A(vector([1,1,1,1])) (1, 1, 1, 1) sage: A(vector([1,1,1,1])).order() 6 Read AdditiveAbelianGroup? for more. John On 26 April 2014 16:16, Nathann

Re: [sage-support] How to see (1,1,1,1) as an element of Z/3Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z x Z/2Z ?

I don't know what this option actually does, but both seem to work. sage: groups.misc.AdditiveAbelian([2,2,2,3],remember_generators=False)(vector([1,1,1,1])) (1, 1, 1, 1) sage: groups.misc.AdditiveAbelian([2,2,2,3],remember_generators=True)(vector([1,1,1,1])) (1, 1, 1, 1) Also, why should