On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 08:32:11PM -0700, Andrew Mathas wrote: > Then I think the functionality of RestrictedPartitions should be fully > implemented in Partitions > by allowing several keyword entries. > > I had a look at the code and there doesn't seem to be an obvious quick fix > because the classes determined by parts_in and max_length and friends are > generated in different ways. Preumably this is why it is not currently > possible to combine them. There is one rick which might work so I'll have > a play with this when I have time. I guess that we need an > IntersectionEnumeratedSets category:) > > That sounds fine to me. I think that RestrictedPartitions should not be > removed until this happens. This could be addressed at #12278 or at > #13072. > > If I can't think of a way of giving this functionality I'll leave these > classes alone for now, and update the ticket on #12278.
+1 Algorithmically speaking, a proper reimplementation for RestrictedPartitions should probably be done using species; as for mixed keyword entries, I guess we won't have much better than filtering. >From a design perspective, the handling of mixed keywords would be best implemented at the occasion of the refactoring of Partitions using Florent's enumerated sets factories. (see http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10194). Cheers, Nicolas -- Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <[email protected]> http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
