#17920: Reimplement IntegerLists using Polyhedron.integral_points()
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jdemeyer | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: blocker | Milestone: sage-6.6
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jdemeyer/ticket/17920 | 6f3164941f2565627afc1128ace01973c788f767
Dependencies: #17937 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jdemeyer):
Replying to [comment:62 tscrim]:
> I'm worried this could lead to errors being raised when trying to
convert between different bases of the symmetric functions (which are
indexed by partitions). IIRC the code relies on some of the (graded)
transition matrices being upper triangular, which requires the order be
compatible with dominance ordering.
To be honest, I don't know what you mean mathematically. But, like I said,
the fact that there are no strange doctest failures shows that the issue
cannot be so serious.
And in the cases where the order really matters, I think those places
should simply explicitly sort or use `IntegerListsLex`. Slowing down all
of `Paritions()` just because one or two applications require it seems
stupid.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17920#comment:63>
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.
