-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 580
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
Chain homotopies #19179
Comments
Branch: u/jhpalmieri/chains |
New commits:
|
Commit: |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Dependencies: #6102 |
comment:4
It's too messy for me to disentangle this from #6102, so that ticket and this are now dependencies of each other. In particular, the most natural way to construct examples of chain contractions is to use the algebraic topological model of a complex (which is part of #6102). So some of the examples here use code that is part of #6102. The actual code here doesn't depend on #6102, just those few examples. |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:8
#18246 broke the default hashing of chain homotopies, so I've added a |
comment:9
This looks strange, in chain_complex_morphism.py:
Should the last line be removed ? |
comment:10
Yes, thank you. |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:12
I've been playing around with this for the last week and I'm essentially ready to give the ticket a positive review. I can think of a couple of very minor improvements that might be better addressed in a follow-up ticket:
I encountered one more serious surprise in my experiments, and I'm not quite sure how to address this: I was starting with a chain complex
I would have expected an error here, and possibly a more convenient way to carry out the base change. As for the patchbot errors: these are a bit confusing; I think they're all due to the fact that the dependencies of the ticket have not been properly merged for the test. Given the dependencies with #6101, #6102 I wonder if it isn't the best approach to approve them all at once, eventually.... (?) |
comment:13
With your example, using If you are willing to give this a positive review, then #6101 should come next, but neither will get merged without the other. |
comment:14
a few remarks on the doc:
|
Changed keywords from none to homotopy |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:16
Replying to @fchapoton:
Done
Done (removed
This was already there, but I added a sentence.
Right, fixed.
Done. |
comment:17
ok, thanks. Then good to go. It will of course be pending until #6102 is reviewed. |
Reviewer: Frédéric Chapoton |
comment:20
Circular dependency, please make up your mind what you want merged first |
comment:21
This one first please, but it will not pass the doctests alone. |
Changed dependencies from #6102 to none |
Changed branch from u/jhpalmieri/chains to |
This ticket add chain homotopies, chain contractions, and duals of chain maps and chain homotopies. This is a dependency for #6101 and #6102.
CC: @tscrim @fchapoton
Component: algebraic topology
Keywords: homotopy
Author: John Palmieri
Branch/Commit:
4d53526
Reviewer: Frédéric Chapoton
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19179
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: