#16598: Useless new classes and a replacement for _check_pbd
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  ncohen             |        Owner:
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_review
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.3
      Component:  combinatorial      |   Resolution:
  designs                            |    Merged in:
       Keywords:                     |    Reviewers:
        Authors:  Nathann Cohen      |  Work issues:
Report Upstream:  N/A                |       Commit:
         Branch:  u/ncohen/16598     |  fa3c715732a965786f86a2a0ce7087c63294519a
   Dependencies:  #16553             |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by ncohen):

 > All right, add the extra assumption that each point is covered by at
 least one block! If not `.groups()` raises an exception.

 It's unrelated. What are the blocks of
 `IncidenceStructure(4,[[0,1],[1,2],[2,3]])` ? I am just telling you that
 "u~v" if the pair `u,v` is not covered by a block is not an equivalence
 relation unless you are in a GDD.

 Nathann

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16598#comment:16>
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/d/optout.

Reply via email to