> Frederic, > > I pushed a patch (coxeter_ms.patch) to the sage-combinat server. > > Now you should get > > sage: W=WeylGroup(['A',2]) > sage: w=W.from_reduced_word([1,2,1]) > sage: w.inversions() > [alpha[1], alpha[1] + alpha[2], alpha[2]] > > which is much nicer. > > --Mark
Jean Michel wrote: > The list of inversions, in my view, should preferably be a list > of > reflections (which does not need the existence of roots and makes sense > for > abstract Coxeter groups). It seems to me that inversions could have a switch such that it returns either the positive root or the corresponding reflection. (The second could be valid in an arbitrary Coxeter group.) In other words, something like this: sage: w.inversions() [alpha[1], alpha[1] + alpha[2], alpha[2]] sage: w.inversions(reflections=True) [s1,s1*s2*s1,s2] Dan -- 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.
