Closed lgoettgens closed 4 months ago
Thanks.
Then what about AbstractAlgebra.AdditiveGroupElem
?
Then what about
AbstractAlgebra.AdditiveGroupElem
?
There is no interface for AdditiveGroupElem
defined at all here. Thus I would find it a bit weird to just add broadcastable
and nothing else. Maybe @fingolfin or @thofma have some opinion on this?
This will clash with broadcasting of matrices.
This will clash with broadcasting of matrices.
I had thought that such problems don't occur because we distinguish between matrices and matrix group elements.
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 86.91%. Comparing base (
8a5e06f
) to head (16f1e1d
).
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
I had thought that such problems don't occur because we distinguish between matrices and matrix group elements.
This is true, but unrelated.
julia> x = ZZ[1 2; 3 4]
[1 2]
[3 4]
julia> x isa AbstractAlgebra.AdditiveGroupElem
true
Thanks @thofma. So we should not add this for AdditiveGroupElem but only for FinGenAbGrpElem
Replaces and thus closes https://github.com/oscar-system/Oscar.jl/pull/3787.
We already have the analogous thing for NCRingElem, so I see no reason not to have it for GroupElem.
cc @ThomasBreuer