#19435: Poset documentation polishing: New posets from old ones
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: jmantysalo | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-7.2
Component: documentation | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jori Mäntysalo | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jmantysalo/poset_documentation_polishing__new_posets_from_old_ones|
41e3a4b15d9e38f74cf865afd04a3b79d1fa38ce
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jmantysalo):
Replying to [comment:3 kdilks]:
> * Potential issue with the example in {{{connected_components()}}}
giving the covering relations of the first connected component, since
{{{cover_relations()}}} returns an ordered list, but strictly speaking is
an unordered set. Not really an issue, since I imagine the code will
always return it in the order given, but it's something to think about.
This is true, and I do not know a good way to overcome this. `# random
order` is one possibility. For a user perspective I see no problem when
documentation says that a function returns `[3, 5]`, but he/she gots `[5,
3]`; if the user has any clue at all, he will understand that the list
represents a set.
For some posets we could use `linear_extension=True`, but it only applies
to list of elements, and is kind of noise to the user.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19435#comment:4>
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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
