-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 160
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improve bicoset code #2686
Merged
Merged
Improve bicoset code #2686
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ | ||
# We used to allow multiplying and inverting right cosets for which this | ||
# was not valid. This test verifies this is not the case anymore. | ||
# See <https://github.com/gap-system/gap/issues/2555> | ||
gap> G := SymmetricGroup(3);; | ||
gap> U := Group( (1,2) );; | ||
gap> cos1 := RightCoset(U, (1,2));; | ||
gap> cos2 := RightCoset(U, (1,3));; | ||
gap> IsBiCoset(cos1); | ||
true | ||
gap> IsBiCoset(cos2); | ||
false | ||
|
||
# | ||
gap> cos1*cos1 = cos1; | ||
true | ||
gap> cos1*cos2 = cos2; | ||
true | ||
gap> cos2*cos1; | ||
Error, right cosets can only be multiplied if the left operand is a bicoset | ||
|
||
# | ||
gap> cos1^-1 = cos1; | ||
true | ||
gap> cos2^-1; | ||
Error, only right cosets which are bicosets can be inverted |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Making this an error will hard block any future attempt to define multiplication of ordinary cosets (e.g. as multiplication of sets) in a more general way through other methods. Is this deliberate?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This was quite deliberate, i.e., I thought quite a while about whether to change this into an error; or whether to instead change the
Inverse
method to useTryNextMethod()
instead ofError
-- in any case, I think they should match.However, in the end I think a clear helpful error message is far better than a "method not found", just to support a hypothetical future extension which may never come. Besides, we actually don't stop anybody from adding one: they just have to rank their method higher than ours (and make sure to stay compatibly / invoke
TryNextMethod()
if needed). Finally, we can of course always change the error into something else if it ever becomes necessary.