#17979: Reimplementation of IntegerListsLex
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: aschilling | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_work
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, Travis Scrimshaw
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
public/ticket/17979 | 8e772296baa21463a7a8f1957fd4e4e918c5414e
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by aschilling):
Replying to [comment:314 jdemeyer]:
> Replying to [comment:312 aschilling]:
> > Replying to [comment:299 jdemeyer]:
> > > This is one more example which currently does not work:
> > > {{{
> > > sage: IntegerListsLex(length=1, max_slope=0, min_slope=1).list()
> > > }}}
> >
> > The current output is correct, isn't it? [Infinity] would be the
output in inverse lexicographic order, which results in the error message
that m is unbounded.
>
> Sorry, I obviously meant
> {{{
> sage: IntegerListsLex(length=2, max_slope=0, min_slope=1).list()
> }}}
> which should have an empty output.
Even in this case, I think Sage is currently correct, unless you can
define what Infinity-Infinity is (which would be used in the slope
conditions).
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17979#comment:333>
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.
