Skip to content
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

details on complex reflection groups #35574

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 28, 2023

Conversation

fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

📚 Description

Remove a deprecated method in the category of complex reflection groups

Also one little code enhancement

and some pep8 cleanups.

📝 Checklist

  • The title is concise, informative, and self-explanatory.
  • The description explains in detail what this PR is about.
  • I have linked a relevant issue or discussion.
  • I have created tests covering the changes.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

⌛ Dependencies

Copy link
Contributor

@mkoeppe mkoeppe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. The test failure must be sporadic-unrelated.

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am not so sure that the test failure is unrelated. Of course, the changes look rather harmless..

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented May 21, 2023

Merge conflict,

@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented May 22, 2023

Merge conflict

@github-actions
Copy link

Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit 679fc1a) is ready! 🎉

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor Author

setting back to positive aftere trivial merge

@vbraun vbraun merged commit 18a217e into sagemath:develop May 28, 2023
@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-10.1 milestone May 28, 2023
@fchapoton fchapoton deleted the on_complex_refl_groups branch July 16, 2023 19:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants