#13233: Add simple SST poset to the posets examples
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Reporter: jcbeier | Owner: sage-combinat
Type: enhancement | Status: positive_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-5.3
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: sd40 | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers: Jessica Striker
Authors: J Beier | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Comment (by aschilling):
Hi Jessica and Julie,
Great that you wrote your first patch. I have a couple of requests for the
doc tests:
First of all, there is a spelling error "certianly". Also, the EXAMPLES
are not so useful. It might be a good idea to include a test like
{{{
sage: P.vertices()
...
sage: P.cover_relations()
}}}
to make sure to really specify the poset in the doctests.
Thanks,
Anne
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13233#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 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.
