On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery
<nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr> wrote:
> Rationale:
>
> (a) For the option name: that might be just me, but I find
> ``generators`` far more natural than ``connecting_set``.
> This specifies an alternative set of generators for (a subgroup
> of) G.
If it's just the name of the option, I'm fine with generators or connecting set.
> (b) For removing connecting_set = a: this feature cannot be
> implemented in a robust way. If a is a tuple or an iterator, how
> can cayley_graph determines generically whether a is an iterable
> of elements of G, or some data that can be coerced into a single
> element of G?
I really thought you meant that {generators, connecting_set} = [a] was
being deprecated. That's obviously ridiculous.
> PS: for the record: I did go the extra mile to write this patch, and
> to use the occasion of a very specific feature I needed to do cleanup
> in an area of code far from my own. It hence did take me a conscious
> effort to wave as unintended the apparent aggressive and non-welcoming
> tone of the feedback I got. No grumpy'o pa shooting please.
Nicolas,
I misunderstood what you originally wrote, and I was in quite a hurry,
so I had little time to write a reply. You are completely correct, in
that the interrogative tone was quite by mistake. I was just very
surprised at the moment by my mistaken impression of what this patch
did. Please accept my apology. :)
--
Robert L. Miller
http://www.rlmiller.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
