On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 09:03:59PM +0200, Christian Stump wrote:
> Since WeylGroups has CoxeterGroups as a super category, to me it seems
> be perfectly reasonable to name both methods "inversions", The one
> from WeylGroups then overwrite the one from CoxeterGroups
Indeed.
As for usual inheritance, if a method ``foo'' implemented in
WeylGroups overwrites one in CoxeterGroups, then it should have the
same semantic. For example, that in WeylGroups should accept all the
options of that in CoxeterGroups (and possibly more). This to ensure
that a Weyl group W *is a* Coxeter group, and behaves as such.
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.
