Skip to content

Conversation

@stevelinton
Copy link
Contributor

Trivial change, but making a PR in case it breaks something subtle.

@olexandr-konovalov olexandr-konovalov added the gapsagedays2016 Issues and PRs that arose at https://www.gapdays.de/gap-sage-days2016 label Jan 17, 2016
@fingolfin
Copy link
Member

As discussed on the mailing list, I am not quite sure we want that.

The alternative would be to change the documentation for IsPGroup, and actually allow infinite p-groups... Gotta look at the GAP library and packages using IsPGroup to decided whether that is feasible, though...

@stevelinton stevelinton changed the title Add implication that IsPGroup implies IsFinite in line with the documentation Experimental: Add implication that IsPGroup implies IsFinite in line with the documentation Jan 18, 2016
@fingolfin
Copy link
Member

I personally would prefer to do the opposite of this PR, see PR #1545.

@fingolfin
Copy link
Member

I proposed on the mailing list to change IsPGroup to not imply IsFinite, and there was agreement there.

So I am closing this now in favor of PR #1545.

@fingolfin fingolfin closed this Mar 21, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

gapsagedays2016 Issues and PRs that arose at https://www.gapdays.de/gap-sage-days2016

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants