> < ^ From:

^ Subject:

Dear Dr. Gurican,

In your last letter you had asked what formal requirements your

students work would have to fulfill in order to be submitted for

possible inclusion with GAP. There are three obvious ones:

1. There should be a consistent and complete description (in English)

of the theoretical background. As in papers, otherwise published

material can be quoted, but for readability at least all definitions

should be given and proofs of any claims that cannot be found in the

literature.

2. There should be a clear description of the implemented functions

and their use that is as similar as possible in style and format to

the descriptions in the GAP manual. That is, if the functions would be

incorporated into GAP manual then these descriptions should fit into

the manual.

3. There should be clearly written GAP code with well written and

helpful comments on what the function is doing.

All this should be in a reasonably final form. It may be that the

referee might have suggestions for improvement, but (s)he should not

have the task to find a path through wilderness.

What I have so far got from you was not yet in such a form but rather

represented sketches of the state of the development of ideas at a

certain time. Please do not be offended that much to my regret I

simply do not have the time to work my way through that and to write

long letters of recommendations (nor can I ask a referee to do that).

I have sometimes a dozen letters per day to answer and of course I

have my normal teaching load and my own students. It is most

certainly not snobism or bad will, but simply lack of time that I

cannot really help students in other places through their initial

problems, but I will try to help with getting information and

eventually finding a referee.

Wishing further good progress with the permutational products, with

kind regards Joachim Neubueser

> < [top]