On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 02:05:24PM -0500, msh...@math.vt.edu wrote:
> However consider the operation of a coxeter group element,
> which right-multiplies by a simple reflection.
> Why can't this be incorporated into the abstract class?
> Currently it is not.
>
> Even though the different versions of coxeter groups
> are implemented differently, I am assuming that each version
> must know what its simple reflections are, and how to right multiply
> a given element by a simple reflection.
The point is that the default implementation of multiplication is
based on apply_simple_reflection (which is some sort of
lower-level). Of course, there are cases (like when the elements of
the group are represented as matrices) where one would want to jut
implement multiplication, and have apply_simple_reflection be defined
in term of it. So in principle one could put both default
implementations, and request that a Coxeter group should implement at
least one of the two. I have not done so yet because one wants to
raise a meaningful exception if the Coxeter group fails to do so
(rather than go in an infinite recursion loop); that requires a bit of
care, and we are currently lacking a good short idiom for this.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
