On Apr 8, 1:03 pm, John H Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 12:56 pm, "Justin C. Walker" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 8, 2009, at 12:07 , gerhard wrote:
>
> > > Print methods for matrices with subdivisions
>
> > > let M be a matrix over QQ:
> > > subdivisions are printed fine
> > > over GF(2):
> > > M.get_subdivisions() shows the subdivisions are defined,
> > > but the print method does not know about them.
>
> > Yup. Most matrix classes seem to use a common method for printing,
> > while the 'mod 2' matrix implementation has its own "stringify" method.
>
> > There may be a good explanation for this, but commenting out the mod2
> > method seems to have the right effect without damaging anything else.
> > At least with minimal testing.
>
> Another workaround: if M is a matrix over GF(2), then do this:
>
> sage: MS = M.sparse_matrix()
> sage: MS.subdivide(2,3)
>
> The subdivisions in MS should appear: the problem is only in dense
> matrices over GF(2).
>
> > > The show methods cannot handle subdivisions altogether.
>
> > I'm not sure I understand. For other than the mod 2 elements, show(X)
> > produces an image of a subdivided matrix. Do you mean just in the mod
> > 2 case?
>
> > > Are there any plans to enhance these printing methods?
>
> > I think it qualifies as a bug, and I've created a Trac report for the
> > problem:
> > <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5714>
>
> Hi Justin,
>
> I also created a ticket, <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/
> 5715>, with a patch, deleting the str method for dense mod 2
> matrices.
I'll mark mine as a duplicate. Go ahead with your patch.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
