#17979: Reimplementation of IntegerListsLex
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: aschilling | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: blocker | Milestone: sage-6.6
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: days64 | Merged in:
Authors: Bryan Gillespie, | Reviewers: Nathann Cohen, Jeroen
Anne Schilling, Nicolas M. Thiery | Demeyer
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
public/ticket/17979 | dba4c6233d2af762986501528370c84c1d24736a
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nthiery):
Replying to [comment:213 jdemeyer]:
> Fine, I understand your point. However, I think it should perhaps be
phrased in a more informal way. Since you talk about polynomial-time, it
''sounds'' like the statement of some mathematical theorem, but it isn't.
>
> You can just say something like "it's fast in practice for simple
examples".
Ok. Fast being very vague I tried to reformulate this, as well as the
comment on the complexity in `IntegerListsLex`, to be less formal
while still giving some useful indication to the reader.
I very much hope that at some point we will be able to replace this by
precise complexity information, at least within well defined cases.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17979#comment:237>
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.
