#14882: Typos in sage/combinat/backtrack.py
---------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Reporter: darij | Owner: sage-combinat
Type: defect | Status: positive_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-5.12
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: combinat, backtrack | Merged in:
Authors: Darij Grinberg | Reviewers: Travis Scrimshaw
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Dependencies:
Stopgaps: |
---------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Description changed by jdemeyer:
Old description:
> **UPDATE:** The doctest issue has been solved by Travis in #14772; my
> (updated) patch now just fixes the typos.
>
> * Apply: [attachment:trac_14882-spelling_in_backtrack-dg.patch]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> **Old description:** It's in the docstring of
> ``PositiveIntegerSemigroup``:
>
> {{{
> EXAMPLES::
>
> sage: from sage.combinat.backtrack import
> PositiveIntegerSemigroup
> sage: PP = PositiveIntegerSemigroup()
> sage: PP.category()
> Join of Category of infinite enumerated sets and Category of
> commutative additive semigroups and Category of monoids and Category of
> facade sets
> sage: PP.cardinality()
> +Infinity
> sage: PP.one()
> 1
> sage: PP.an_element()
> 1
> sage: some_elements = list(PP.some_elements()); some_elements
> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18,
> 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36,
> 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54,
> 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72,
> 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90,
> 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100]
>
> TESTS::
>
> sage: from sage.combinat.backtrack import
> PositiveIntegerSemigroup
> sage: PP = PositiveIntegerSemigroup()
> sage: TestSuite(PP).run(elements=some_elements)
> }}}
>
> This TestSuite call takes 1.44 min on my machine, and this persists even
> if I replace the ``some_elements`` list (with length 100) by a list of
> length 2 or even an empty list. I don't see what there is that can be
> tested so long about positive integers...
>
> The attached patch doesn't solve the underlying problem, but just
> #longtimes the computation so that it does not lame me down when I want
> to doctest sage.combinat. I would love to help, but I don't know enough
> about test suites.
>
> The patch also fixes some spelling.
New description:
* Apply: [attachment:trac_14882-spelling_in_backtrack-dg.patch]
--
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14882#comment:13>
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
