#9296: Add lattice computations for convex polyhedral cones
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Reporter: vbraun | Owner: mhampton
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.5
Component: geometry | Keywords:
Author: Volker Braun | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: Andrey Novoseltsev | Merged:
Work_issues: |
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Comment(by novoselt):
3) I think the best resolution here will be to get opinions from other
people, ideally more than one... I'll start a thread on sage-devel if it
works again for me, I had problems last couple of days.
Some more little comments (I am willing to give a positive review even if
they are left as is):
* Is there a reason why do you want to return a list in `ray_basis`
instead of a tuple? (`self.rays(indices)` will give the same vectors as
the last line there, but as a tuple instead of a list) Do you think that
this basis may be required frequently? I.e. is there any point in caching
it? (In which case it probably should be a tuple to avoid accidental
changes). Also, it may make sense to actually use `IntegralRayCollection`
for bases, since it will allow easy switch between different
representations (e.g. matrix, which is now done by `ray_basis_matrix`).
* Why does `is_trivial` documentation mention fans? I mean, there is
nothing wrong in what is written there, I don't understand why it is
there. I also try to have each docstring start with a one-line description
if at all possible. I believe it is somewhere in Python coding guidelines,
or maybe even Sage ones.
* INPUT/OUTPUT blocks are formatted differently from guidelines here
http://sagemath.org/doc/developer/conventions.html#documentation-strings
(although I have to admit that I also don't quite follow it in terms of
default values, because it does not always feel natural).
* I think that the plan is to eventually require INPUT/OUTPUT blocks in
every function, unless there is no input and/or output at all. So it may
be a good idea to add OUTPUT to things like `is_trivial`, even though the
documentation already does describe the output.
* Can we use `point` instead of `n` in functions like `N_projection`? I
don't quite associate `n` with an element of a lattice (especially when
the lattice is not called `N`) and since it is an input parameter, it
would be nice to have it more descriptive.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9296#comment:7>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
