#12930: Poset of Alternating sign matrices
-------------------------------------------------------------+--------------
Reporter: aschilling | Owner:
sage-combinat
Type: enhancement | Status:
needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone:
sage-5.1
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: alternating sign matrices, posets, days38 | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Frederic Chapoton, Anne Schilling
Authors: Pierre Cagne | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------------------+--------------
Comment (by aschilling):
Hi Pierre,
> The failure you get with 'sage -t' is due to something weird about
doctesting (cf #10458, you can't use multi-line tests due to some
formattings by the IPython interactive shell). But removing this, I get a
ton of others doctest failure : i'm working on it.
Could you point me to the line in your code? I think if you use
{{{
...
}}}
instead of
{{{
...:
}}}
it should work.
I noticed that sometimes you do not repeat a definition (for example of A)
from one doctest to the next. Is this the problem when you remove the
offending doctest?
> I notably get some failure about the tests which passed for the
implementation with CombinatorialClass because of the inherited methods
like first(), last() or random_element(). By dropping out the inheritance
in favor of Parent, we loose those kind of methods. However, the
implementations of those are naive and do not bring any improvement in
comparison with a user's straightforward implementation.
> For example, this is last() :
>
> {{{
> for i in self:
> pass
> return i
> }}}
>
> So I'm wondering about the usefulness of the reimplementation of those
methods. Maybe can we skip them ?
Most likely skipping them is ok. Perhaps confirm this with Nicolas.
> In fact, this is the only removing/renaming code (that we have to
'deprecate' so, but maybe as the CombinatorialClass level directly). For
the rest, I kept by default all the old implementation and allowed mine by
keyword option. For example :
>
> {{{
> A = AlternatingSignMatrices(4) #inner implementation uses contre-
tableaux as before
> A = AlternatingSignMatrices(4, use_monotone_triangles=True) #inner
implementation uses monotone triangles as it should
> }}}
Don't we want to get rid of the name contre-tableaux at some point? I was
thinking of deprecating that name, so that at some point there would only
be monotone_triangles.
> I noticed also that EXAMPLES and TESTS are checked by 'sage -t' : is
there a real difference between them ?
Yes, both are tested. For myself, I usually use EXAMPLES if these are
tests that are also useful for the user to read to understand how the code
is used. TESTS is for internal tests like in __init__ or something like
this or corner cases that need to be checked, but not necessarily read.
Best wishes,
Anne
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12930#comment:11>
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.
