#10930: specializations for symmetric functions
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
   Reporter:  mantepse       |       Owner:  mantepse                           
                                      
       Type:  enhancement    |      Status:  new                                
                                      
   Priority:  minor          |   Milestone:  sage-4.7                           
                                      
  Component:  combinatorics  |    Keywords:  principal specialization, 
exponential specialization, symmetric functions
     Author:  Martin Rubey   |    Upstream:  N/A                                
                                      
   Reviewer:                 |      Merged:                                     
                                      
Work_issues:                 |  
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------

Comment(by mantepse):

 Hi Jason!

 Many thanks for your quick comments.

 1) Using trace I find

 {{{
 sage: S = SymmetricFunctions(QQ); s=S.s(); f = s[2,1]
 sage: trace("f.principal_specialization()")
 > <string>(1)<module>()

 ipdb> s
 --Call--
 > /home/martin/SAGE/local/lib/python2.6/site-
 packages/sage/combinat/sf/sfa.py(1653)principal_specialization()
    1652
 -> 1653     def principal_specialization(self, n=infinity, q=var('q')):
    1654         r"""

 ipdb> s
 > /home/martin/SAGE/local/lib/python2.6/site-
 packages/sage/combinat/sf/sfa.py(1681)principal_specialization()
    1680         """
 -> 1681         from sage.combinat.sf.sf import SymmetricFunctions
    1682         p = SymmetricFunctions(self.parent().base_ring()).p()

 ipdb>
 }}}
 but I was hoping that the principal specialisation from schur.py would be
 called.

 2) Well, currently the actual value of 1 is not used at all (I test q==1
 and call principal_specialization without passing q).  So my question
 really is: some day somebody might implement something where the q is
 actually used.  Is it better then if the default is None and the doc says,
 None should always mean one?

 Thanks again!

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10930#comment:5>
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.

Reply via email to