On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Alex Ghitza <aghi...@gmail.com> wrote:
... > > > So after all this I'm still not sure what the right fix is. If GAP often > gives us the characters in an order that's standard (e.g. following the > Atlas), then of course it would be rather annoying for Sage to sort the > list according to some other half-baked criterion. On the other hand, > if there are situations where a randomised algorithm is used and the > ordering is not guaranteed to always be the same, that's going to mess > with our doctests. Having written this paragraph and read it a couple > of times, I tend to say: > (a) fix the doctest "broken" by the upgrade to gap 4.4.12 manually (no > sorting, just replace the old answer by the new one) > (b) don't touch irreducible_characters() and respect whatever ordering > GAP gives, and > (c) if/when comparison of Sage number field elements gets fixed, replace > the said doctest with the one using sorted() > > This would my proposal for irreducible_characters(). For > word_problem(), I still think that returning a sorted list is a good > idea, but I'd like to know what David thinks. > I agree with (a), (b), (c), and think you wrote a good summary of the problem. > > Best, > Alex > > > -- > Alex Ghitza -- Lecturer in Mathematics -- The University of Melbourne > -- Australia -- http://www.ms.unimelb.edu.au/~aghitza/ > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org > -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
