Andrew and Nicolas, > But I don't think many -- if any -- are using directly the > HeckeAlgebraRepresentation class. So feel free to move it around > and/or refactor it. It would definitely be sensible to have two > classes in the sage.algebras.hecke_algebras: > > class IwahoriHeckeAlgebraRepresentation: > class > AffineIwahoriHeckeAlgebraRepresentation(IwahoriHeckeAlgebraRepresentation):
I used HeckeAlgebraRepresentation extensively to define smash products involving Hecke algebras. I implemented Hecke algebras for unequal parameters, extended affine Hecke algebras (with the duality isomorphism coercions) which is peculiar to affine root systems, and the double affine Hecke algebra (currently without the full duality coercions). All have several realizations. I implemented smash products, morphisms of tensor products, grouped tensor products, and used all that stuff extensively. However my Hecke algebra code assumes generic parameters. I already regret that because right now I'm really interested in the nilDAHA. I could use advice on user conventions for setting parameters and such. Since my goal was the DAHA coercions I had to do lots of multiple realizations, starting with extended affine Weyl groups and moving up the food chain of Hecke algebras. I am not near to being ready to start merging my code into sage proper but I should probably do a lot of coordinating with Andrew. --Mark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
