Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Exterior powers of finitely presented modules #2879
Exterior powers of finitely presented modules #2879
Changes from 22 commits
c5f674f
f2ca620
ed0e6f9
abfc597
7947688
4062c3b
48b9752
4c34531
af69344
37de4fe
1e0b127
6ace053
9a4b50e
36f6396
769478e
fd61072
aa9828b
5fce897
c25a897
2de9aad
cb807f0
df75af0
ddf43ce
452ae32
bdb32a2
362d188
7c3fb55
dc39ef1
d395414
40d381e
e40d9e4
746a00e
a364de6
b5134b9
9be4f7e
c2d2e67
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Why is this struct mutable?
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.
Good question. It probably shouldn't be, unless we want to allow in-place iteration. Do we? Is there a potential speedup from making it immutable?
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.
This makes this function
_mult
not type stable. Maybeor (IMHO nicer)
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.
Thanks for the catch. But the second needs to reallocate memory, doesn't it?
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.
So... this is essentially the parent of
OrderedMultiIndex{T}
, except that it does not specifyT
...? Or "hardcodes"T
to beInt
(?)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.
I was not so sure about this, to be honest. It's not actually a parent in the Oscar sense, but in spirit: yes. And it's true: It doesn't know about the
T
. But it's hardcoded only in the sense that iterating over this will always produce anOrderedMultiIndex
withT = Int64
.At some point I thought of removing the
T
altogether, but then I didn't see any real problem in keeping it either. It's just a bit weird thatOrderdMultiIndexSet
doesn't know about it. But since it's not an actual parent: Do you see a real problem here?