#10998: Categories for posets
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   Reporter:  nthiery                                                           
  |          Owner:  sage-combinat                                        
       Type:  enhancement                                                       
  |         Status:  needs_work                                           
   Priority:  major                                                             
  |      Milestone:  sage-4.7.1                                           
  Component:  combinatorics                                                     
  |       Keywords:  days30, sd31                                         
Work_issues:                                                                    
  |       Upstream:  N/A                                                  
   Reviewer:  Franco Saliola, Christian Stump, Nicolas M. Thiéry, Florent 
Hivert  |         Author:  Frédéric Chapoton, Christian Stump, Nicolas M. Thiéry
     Merged:                                                                    
  |   Dependencies:  #11289, #10938, #9065                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Comment(by hivert):

 > Why exactly are posets unique? Isn't it expensive to check that two
 posets
 > are equivalent? I am interested in dealing with face lattices of about
 10^5^
 > elements, how long would it take to check their equality? Maybe elements
 of
 > posets should be unique, but not posets themselves?

 As far as I understood, there is not check for equivalence, is it ?
 Actually,
 I'm not sure what you mean by equivalence opposed to equality. However I
 see
 no reason why two posets with the same element and the same ordering
 should be
 different object: mathematically they are the same set with the same
 ordering...

 More pragmatically, I have some code using poset as key for hash tables.
 At
 first I didn't ensure that posets were unique then the code end-up
 spending
 all the time comparing poset that is comparing the underlying graph.

 In my opinion, if you need to see two equal poset as different, this is
 because you have some more information on those poset (eg: some tag saying
 where it come from). If it is the case, I have the feeling that you should
 inherit a class from poset which adds the tag and use it for comparison
 and
 creation so that two differently tagged posets will be different for is as
 for
 ==.

 My two cents,

 Florent

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10998#comment:37>
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