#14846: CycleIndexSeries derivative, integral, exponential methods are not
combinatorial
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: agd | Owner: agd
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.1
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Andrew Gainer- | Reviewers: mantepse
Dewar | Work issues: documentation
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: u/agd/cis/deriv | 5547d749d9136f0eddf4400237183b78245e3f51
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by mantepse):
Hi Andrew,
I'd suggest to really remove access to the three inherited methods, and
rewrite the methods that use _lps_exponential accordingly:
* in set_species, we really want to return the "true" exponential cycle
index series
* in partition_species, the "true" exponential of the "true" exponential -
1
* in subset_species, the square of the "true" exponential
Finally, the implementation of the "true" exponential can be taken from
what's in set_species in sage 6.0.
As far as I can see, the other two methods _lps_derivative and
_lps_integral are not used anywhere.
This might have a speed penalty, but I'd worry about that only if it's
serious. I think it's not a good idea to make the cycle index series
depend on the species code, as in the proposed patch.
Martin
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14846#comment:14>
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.
