-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 162
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
Added Documentation for DecomPoly and NormalizerViaRadical #2360
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -4528,6 +4528,38 @@ DeclareGlobalFunction("GroupEnumeratorByClosure"); | |
DeclareOperation( "LowIndexSubgroups", | ||
[ IsGroup, IsPosInt ] ); | ||
|
||
############################################################################# | ||
## | ||
#F NormalizerViaRadical(<G>,<S>) | ||
## | ||
## <#GAPDoc Label="NormalizerViaRadical"> | ||
## <ManSection> | ||
## <Func Name="NormalizerViaRadical" Arg='G,S'/> | ||
## | ||
## <Description> | ||
## This function implements a particular approach, following the | ||
## SolvableRadical paradigm, for calculating the | ||
## normalizer of a subgroup <A>S</A> in <A>G</A>. It is at the moment | ||
## provided only as a separate function, and not as method for the operation | ||
## <C>Normalizer</C>, as it can often be slower than other built-in routines. | ||
## In certain hard cases (non-solvable groups with nontrivial radical), however | ||
## its performance is substantially superior. | ||
## The function thus is provided as a | ||
## non-automated tool for advanced users. | ||
## <Example><![CDATA[ | ||
## gap> g:=TransitiveGroup(30,2030);; | ||
## gap> s:=SylowSubgroup(g,5);; | ||
## gap> Size(NormalizerViaRadical(g,s)); | ||
## 28800 | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Sounds good to me. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This example of course is slower than the backtrack There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That's OK, I think (though we might want to mention that the given example is not actually one where There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Added a line about example and inserted |
||
## ]]></Example> | ||
## Note that this example only demonstrates usage, but that in this case | ||
## in fact the ordinary <C>Normalizer</C> routine performs faster. | ||
## </Description> | ||
## </ManSection> | ||
## <#/GAPDoc> | ||
## | ||
DeclareGlobalFunction("NormalizerViaRadical"); | ||
|
||
############################################################################# | ||
## | ||
#E | ||
|
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.
Offtopic: the reference manual says this on
X
:Now, don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting you should change the examples; rather, I always use
X
myself, so I am wondering if this last sentence in the manual should just be deleted?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.
Yes. (At the time when this was written there was a push to make
X
obsolete as operation.)