the linter is not happy, please fix that

doctests are not passing

Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit 4bdf675; changes) is ready! 🎉

I must say that I feel ignored. What happened to #35684 (comment) ?

The code doesn't even comply with the sage conventions. Most importantly, it is not at all clear (at least to me) why this check does the right thing.

@mantepse - this PR was opened 2 weeks ago. There was ample time to propose improvements

Most importantly, it is not at all clear (at least to me) why this check does the right thing.

the invariants in a given degree are generated by the images of the monomials in this degree under the Reynolds operator $\rho$. The fix just keeps adding linearly independent images of mononials under $\rho$, until there are no more to add.
Actually, it can be sped up by using available info on the invariant ring - e.g. the dimension in this degree may be known in advance, e.g. from the Molien series.
@Bruno-TT - can you look at it?

@mantepse - this PR was opened 2 weeks ago. There was ample time to propose improvements

And so I did - apparently even before the PR was opened. Should I have repeated my comment?

Apologies, I thought that our mighty linters would complain about lines being too long. Unfortunately this hasn't happen,
and the 147-chars line just went in...

As to the correctness question, it's IMHO too basic to be added to the docs.

Should I have repeated my comment?

this certainly would have helped. Anyhow, feel free to open another PR to fix whatever you think needs to be fixed.

Apologies, I thought that our mighty linters would complain about lines being too long. Unfortunately this hasn't happen, and the 147-chars line just went in...

I think that also 'len(x) == 0' is not according to the style guide.

As to the correctness question, it's IMHO too basic to be added to the docs.

The code was fixed already at least twice, without comment, so I doubt that it is too basic.