#13747: Change default behaviour of Poset to facade = True
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
       Reporter:  ncohen         |         Owner:  sage-combinat  
           Type:  defect         |        Status:  needs_review   
       Priority:  major          |     Milestone:  sage-5.6       
      Component:  combinatorics  |    Resolution:                 
       Keywords:                 |   Work issues:                 
Report Upstream:  N/A            |     Reviewers:  Christian Kuper
        Authors:  Nathann Cohen  |     Merged in:                 
   Dependencies:                 |      Stopgaps:                 
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Changes (by ncohen):

  * status:  needs_work => needs_review


Comment:

 Hellooooooooooooooooo !!!

 > The changes in `sage/geometry/fan.py` do not look OK to me:

 And indeedthey aren't `:-P`

 > {{{
 > f = f
 > }}}
 > Seriously???

 You're not in the right frame of mind to appreciate such a change. Here is
 a quote from the Wikipedia Page on monochrome paintings (it actually talks
 about things like that :
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Black_square.jpg)

 ----
 Suprematism and Constructivism

 Monochrome painting as it is usually understood today began in Moscow,
 with Suprematist Composition: White on White [5] of 1918 by Suprematist
 artist Kazimir Malevich. This was a variation on or sequel to his 1915
 work “Black Square on a White Field”, a very important work in its own
 right to 20th century geometric abstraction.
 In 1921, Constructivist artist Alexandr Rodchenko exhibited three
 paintings together, each a monochrome of one of the three primary colours.
 He intended this work to represent The Death of Painting.[6]

 While Rodchenko intended his monochrome to be a dismantling of the typical
 assumptions of painting, Malevich saw his work as a concentration on them,
 a kind of meditation on art’s essence (“pure feeling”).

 These two approaches articulated very early on in its history this kind of
 work’s almost paradoxical dynamic: that one can read a monochrome either
 as a flat surface (material entity or “painting as object”) which
 represents nothing but itself, and therefore representing an ending in the
 evolution of illusionism in painting (i.e. Rodchenko); or as a depiction
 of multidimensional (infinite) space, a fulfillment of illusionistic
 painting, representing a new evolution—a new beginning—in Western
 painting’s history (Malevich). Additionally, many have pointed out that it
 may be difficult to deduce the artist’s intentions from the painting
 itself, without referring to the artist’s comment.
 ----

 So of course, f=f could seem a bit trivial and useless to you. You may
 even think that you could have done it by yourself. But the truth is that
 there is a depth behind that you just cannot appreciate.

 I removed it from the new version of my patch, because I don't get it
 either.

 >
 > {{{
 > 'agree'
 > }}}
 > instead of
 > {{{
 > "agree"
 > }}}
 > just a change for the sake of change?

 Totally. I love change. I first intended to replace "agree" by
 $#$aaaagrRRrrrrrrrrreeeeeee$#$ but hesitated when I considered the
 extravagant cost of the characters.
 This, and because emacs seems to have trouble with the " in the docstring,
 and for this reason believed that in the rest of the file comments were
 code, and code comments...
 Do you mind ? `^^;`

 > {{{
 > (e for e in level)
 > }}}
 > Not much better than the first one and it is repeated in
 `sage/geometry/cone.py`. If fixing doctests was done by some script/RE, it
 would be nice to read the result, especially if the code got changed, not
 just doctests as the patch name suggests.

 Of course here I have to make the same remark as previously. There is
 depth in `(e for e in level)`, a depth that is not reached by the
 expression `iter(level)`. I changed it anyway, there and at all other
 places where it was needed.

 Sorry for all that. It's just that I changed these files sooooooooooooo
 many times that I was a bit too excited when it passed all doctests. Thank
 you for looking at it.

 Have fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun !

 Nathann

 P.S. : By the way, if only to relieve you of a legitimate fear if you
 thought that all this was done without me looking : I indeed did most of
 these changes with emacs macros, but each time something was about to be
 changed in the code emacs asked me whether I agreed with the change (he's
 that kind). I only changed code when I thought the change made sense and
 would not change the code's meaning. As I said, I changed this code in so
 many ways, hoping to finally get the doctests to pass, that I just wanted
 to see whether the method worked. And if not, just delete the patch and
 try another way `:-)`

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13747#comment:19>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" 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-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to