Open tscrim opened 3 weeks ago
This has a merge conflict with the splitting of the combinat/all.py
. I will deal with that once this is reviewed (if that is still an issue at that time).
where does the merge conflict comes from ? which pull request ?
maybe the choice of the name ComplexReflectionGroup
is a bit confusing with a category.
It came from the one that split the all.py
files, which has then been reverted. So there shouldn’t be a conflict anymore.
It’s the same situation with, e.g., WeylGroup(s)
. This is most naturally called a complex reflection group at this level of generality; I can’t really call it $G(r,p,n)$. Of course, this isn’t all such groups, but it is the unique infinite family. I guess the $p > 1$ case could be called the ImprimitiveComplexReflectionGroup
(with $p=1$ being the colored permutations). What do you think?
no, ok, I was just asking. It is indeed reasonable to keep your proposed name, with appropriate documentation
I thought a bit more, and I found a name that is perhaps reasonable: "Shephard-Todd family complex reflection group" (abbreviated as STFamilyComplexReflectionGroup
for the class name).
I added a bit more documentation as well. Let me know if there is anything else you would like changed/added.
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit 068040bbf644896fc82d1cad37f64b3c558e9bbf; changes) is ready! :tada: This preview will update shortly after each push to this PR.
We provide an implementation of the whole family of
G(r, p, n)
complex reflection groups by realizing them as a subgroup ofColoredPermutations
.:memo: Checklist
:hourglass: Dependencies