#18511: LatticePoset: add is_sublattice()
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jmantysalo | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-wishlist
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jori Mäntysalo | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jmantysalo/latticeposet__add_is_sublattice__|
c3e1c19e4e7c8c1a666a755c96bb5a23ea921b1a
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
Yo !
> OK. How about the name of the function?
I'd say that it is fine. You think it's wrong in some way?
> > On the other hand, with the current implementation the antichain on 5
elements is a sublattice of the chain on 5 elements.
After that comment I added a big 'ARGGGGGGG' which indicated that for the
tenth time I had only read the code of the undocumented `is_sublattice`
function from `hasse_diagram.py`. Could you please merge the two? The
second function, by itself, is incorrect.
> But that is checked on `lattices.py`. Isn't it slower to access elements
of _hasse_diagram on a loop from another file?
I do not see why. To say it differently, I do not think that Python is
smart enough to optimize anything due to the fact that everything is in
the same file `:-P`
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18511#comment:8>
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.
