Closed mohamed-barakat closed 1 year ago
Does this problem get worse with #1240? If yes, why? If no, why do you want to address it together with #1240?
PR #1240 had multiple versions and is not yet in final form so it is difficult to answer the question at this point:
But here is the issue with the opposite category constructor further detailed:
In line https://github.com/homalg-project/CAP_project/blob/5d2f3fa735cb6095a2f9d5e044a1738b31f2ff4a/CAP/gap/OppositeCategory.gi#L72 the range category is manually set.
only_primitive_operations
is set to true.This asymmetry can be fixed for the current master branch (093bbcd1032bc93cc7ed60ee61f8a1cd28e90be1) and prior to PR #1240 by preventing the opposite category constructor from setting the range category if it is not able to install the operations of the homomorphism structure.
Now PR #1240 reverses the situation and expects the range category to be set for the final derivations to be triggered.
Ah, thanks for the details, I wasn't aware that WrapperCategory also plays a role here.
This issue should be addressed before https://github.com/homalg-project/CAP_project/pull/1240 is merged.