Opened 5 years ago

Closed 5 years ago

#16367 closed enhancement (fixed)

IncidenceStructure.automorphism_group : correct labels

Reported by: ncohen Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: combinatorial designs Keywords:
Cc: vdelecroix, knsam, brett Merged in:
Authors: Nathann Cohen Reviewers: Vincent Delecroix
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: ebe818f (Commits) Commit: ebe818f8914cfb3122066f79876ed999cd68fedc
Dependencies: #16358 Stopgaps:

Description (last modified by ncohen)

PermutationGroup? can handle permutations on any set, and not only 1..n. Given that the designs are defined on range(v), let us avoid some mistakes !

Before

sage: designs.BalancedIncompleteBlockDesign(7,3).automorphism_group()
Permutation Group with generators [(3,5)(6,7), (3,6)(5,7), (2,3)(4,5), (1,2)(5,7)]
sage: designs.BalancedIncompleteBlockDesign(7,3).points()
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

After

sage: designs.BalancedIncompleteBlockDesign(7,3).automorphism_group()
Permutation Group with generators [(2,4)(5,6), (2,5)(4,6), (1,2)(3,4), (0,1)(4,6)]
sage: designs.BalancedIncompleteBlockDesign(7,3).points()
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

Change History (9)

comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

  • Branch set to u/ncohen/16367
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit set to 1dbb5503041da16e371d9314713a511209f329dc

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

267a5f2trac 16358: Wrong answers of IncidenceStructure.automorphism_group()
1dbb550trac #16367: IncidenceStructure.automorphism_group : correct labels

comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

  • Component changed from combinatorics to combinatorial designs

comment:4 follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by vdelecroix

Hi Nathann,

I love this ticket.. but it needs some trivial rebase.

Vincent

comment:5 in reply to: ↑ 4 ; follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

Yo !

I love this ticket.. but it needs some trivial rebase.

Done.

Ahem. I don't want to sound ungrateful or anything, I mean *really* I depend on the work you do when you review tickets because if nobody reviews tickets I am just stuck, and unable to write new code... But for some reason you look like you are "stuck" when something needs a rebase, and there is absolutely nothing on earth that prevents you from fixing merge conflicts... :-P

Branch updated !

Nathann

comment:6 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 1dbb5503041da16e371d9314713a511209f329dc to ebe818f8914cfb3122066f79876ed999cd68fedc

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

d004ebctrac #16358: cleaner doctests for automorphism_group
bcf8fe6trac #16358: Merged with 6.3.beta2
ebe818ftrac #16367: Merged with updated #16358

comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 5 ; follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by vdelecroix

  • Reviewers set to Vincent Delecroix
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

Replying to ncohen:

Yo !

I love this ticket.. but it needs some trivial rebase.

Done.

Ahem. I don't want to sound ungrateful or anything, I mean *really* I depend on the work you do when you review tickets because if nobody reviews tickets I am just stuck, and unable to write new code... But for some reason you look like you are "stuck" when something needs a rebase, and there is absolutely nothing on earth that prevents you from fixing merge conflicts... :-P

I like to give you orders that I know you will execute ;-PP

comment:8 in reply to: ↑ 7 Changed 5 years ago by ncohen

I like to give you orders that I know you will execute ;-PP

http://images.elephantjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/the-finger-250x229.jpg

Nathann

comment:9 Changed 5 years ago by vbraun

  • Branch changed from u/ncohen/16367 to ebe818f8914cfb3122066f79876ed999cd68fedc
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.