#15683: Interval-posets of Tamari
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: VivianePons | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.2
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: combinat, Tamari, | Merged in:
binary trees, Dyck paths | Reviewers:
Authors: Viviane Pons | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: public/combinat | 73373a28ce9916df46c7f7ce00c880aa0259a8cd
/interval-posets-15683 | Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by VivianePons):
> - Yes, please don't import the new module into global namespace. This
seems like a case for lazy import, if not less (what about
`Posets.TamariIntervalPoset`?).
Yes I agree it shouldn't be in the global name space. I'm trying to figure
a solution where it can still be found quite easily. Posets don't seem to
be the right place, it is not directly a poset object and is mostly not
linked to the poset theory.
> - I suspect `greater than ``self``` should be `greater or equal to
``self```.
Where is that? I can't find it.
> - I want more doc and possibly more references. What is a Tamari
interval? (I am talking about intervals in the Tamari order, not about the
general "Tamari interval-posets" which you define nicely. I kind-of know
the answer in the case of trees, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are
nonstandard choices to make.)
I have added a few ref and explanation. A Tamari interval is just a couple
comparable elements in the Lattice, the way you represent elements (Trees,
Dyck paths, whatever) does not matter.
> - The way you are using "vertex parent", it seems that "vertex ancestor"
would be more appropriate. Is this standard notation?
What method are you referring to exactly? I understand a parent to be the
unique direct ancestor of a node in a tree, in this sense, ancestor is not
working (as it can be a level 2 or 3 ancestor).
> - "contained into" should be "contained in". (There is a line break
between "contained" and "into" where this error occurs, in case you want
to find/replace.)
Ok fixed.
> - `t \leq t2` should be `t \leq t_2` in LaTeX mode.
fixed
> - Is it necessary to define a method called `cardinality` which computes
something different from the cardinality of the poset? I would call it
something like `interval_cardinality` instead...
You're right, I changd it to `interval_cardinality` which is clearer.
> - Please don't be shy and link to the arXiv number of your paper:
> {{{
> :arxiv:`1212.0751v1`
> }}}
Done
> As you see I'm nitpicking, and the patch doesn't seem to have serious
issues from a quick glance at it. If you want me to review it, I can do
so, just let me know.
It would be great if you were reviewing it. I'm aware that it's quite some
work, so do as you feel. Frederic already knows the object themselves as
we have worked on them a bit. Your opinion would be very valuable as
you're not familiar with the subject (especially on the doc). I'm the only
one really who knows about these stuff and one of the purpose of this
patch is to make it available, understandable and usable by everyone else.
Anyway, I have pushed most of the changes you suggested. (I haven't
changed the global import yet)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15683#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.
