I find it quite difficult now to follow this thread, I see the answer to
some emails that are not even in the thread...
Anyway, I just want to answer to this specific sentence of Nathan: This is
only technical issues, nothing more. But I hate that it takes one year to
see it fixed.
Well, Nathan,
Yo !
I find it quite difficult now to follow this thread, I see the answer to
some emails that are not even in the thread...
This is because it was sent to both sage-devel and sage-combinat. After a
while somebody anwers to only one group and mess follows.
Anyway, I just want to answer to
Since you ask, here is a thread where you have insulted me repeatedly:
http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16403
Others might think I have asked for it, but that's a different question,
and we can have that debate too if you want. But if we are going to have
that debate, I would ask that you first
Just so you know, I intend to fix the decorator at some point to reduce
whatever impact it could have (I learned a bit a more about decorator while
at PyCon).
Our discussion about this is almost 1 year old. If you do not know how to
clean this code this month, please remove it.
Also, if
I agree, something should have been done a year ago. But If you think it
should be removed and not improved, please do it yourself. Please open and
implement a ticket for that, I will review it.
Paul
Paul-Olivier Dehaye
SNF Professor of Mathematics
University of Zurich
skype: lokami_lokami
Yo !
I agree, something should have been done a year ago.
Cool !
But If you think it should be removed and not improved, please do it
yourself.
If think that If this thing, which was debated one year ago, is not to be
fixed SOON, then we should get rid of it. We are already hosting code
Sorry Nathann, I don't take orders.
If you want to open tickets, just do so. I don't think a ticket removing
the map decorator all together would be positively reviewed right now. If
you really want to know my time frame, I *intend* to work on this decorator
to make it better this summer. If
Sorry Nathann, I don't take orders.
No but you should feel responsible for the mess you add to Sage.
If you want to open tickets, just do so. I don't think a ticket removing the
map decorator all together would be positively reviewed right now. If you
really want to know my time frame, I
thanks for the fast reply -- but I need statistics, not maps. I..e, I'd
like to have a list of all methods applying to permutations that return a
number...
I don't think there is anything like that for statistics, maybe the sign
that we do need more semantic into Sage?
Is it correct
Am Dienstag, 27. Mai 2014 12:10:22 UTC+2 schrieb Viviane Pons:
thanks for the fast reply -- but I need statistics, not maps. I..e, I'd
like to have a list of all methods applying to permutations that return a
number...
I don't think there is anything like that for statistics, maybe
well, there was a decorator for statistics before the move to gitI have
code that used it.
sorry, Martin, that we removed it again!
But you see that Nathann keeps arguing it is not useful to people (I
am not going to participate in that discussion -- I want to do math
and I don't kill my
I would be happy to review any ticket in this direction.
Paul
Paul-Olivier Dehaye
SNF Professor of Mathematics
University of Zurich
skype: lokami_lokami (preferred)
phone: +41 76 407 57 96
chat: pauloliv...@gmail.com
twitter: podehaye
freenode irc: pdehaye
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:54 PM,
Well, a positive review in Sage is just two persons agreeing together.
Maybe you nailed exactly where the problem is. The problem might very well
be that the person that ends up agreeing on the ticket review at the end is
the only one that stuck around. I think that is a strong possibility.
Hello !
Due to the unfortunate absence of professional programmers to write and
review our code
Come on, that is our job.
and of mature professional mathematicians to establish clear strategic
decisions for sage, we should actually as a research community be welcoming
of diverse
Besides: is it possible to run a more exhaustive FindStat search? If I
understand correctly, FindStat limits itself to 3 maps, right?
No -- you can change the 3 into a 5 at most. And the at most is just a
limit to not run for too long, so if you are willing to wait
overnight, we can also do 6
One use case for statistics which comes to my mind immediately is to
provide
answers to
Just to make sure : I *NEVER* said that statistics on combinatorial objects
were useless, did I ? My objections are related to the code that is
included in Sage, and how it is written.
Besides: is it possible to run a more exhaustive FindStat search? If
I understand correctly, FindStat limits itself to 3 maps, right?
No -- you can change the 3 into a 5 at most. And the at most is just a
limit to not run for too long, so if you are willing to wait
overnight, we can
Hello !!!
I must say that I'd love to see the findstat search engine as part of sage.
I would love it too. Querying the findstat database from within Sage
is clearly a good thing.
Nathann
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-combinat-devel group.
Am Dienstag, 27. Mai 2014 20:56:58 UTC+2 schrieb Nathann Cohen:
Hello !!!
I must say that I'd love to see the findstat search engine as part of
sage.
I would love it too. Querying the findstat database from within Sage
is clearly a good thing.
But only half of the story.
Martin
Another question: I would like to search for a statistic (on permutations,
but the question applies in general) that satisfies addtitional structural
constraints (eg., it should be invariant under conjugation with the long
cycle). Is such a search also possible?
The obvious solution is to
Yes! So, if I want to perform such a query, I should send the code
generating the statistic to you, right?
How urgent is it? -- I could try and see if the server explodes if I
increase the 5 to a 7. That way, you can keep playing there.
--
You received this message because you are
How urgent is it? -- I could try and see if the server explodes if I
increase the 5 to a 7. That way, you can keep playing there.
I'll try with 5 first! The reason I did not notice is that you don't get
to choose if you hit search for distribution when looking at an entry in
the
I guess this is getting slightly off topic now, so I'll continue in
private, unless someone objects...
For anything related to FindStat, you can write to i...@findstat.org :)
Many thanks,
Martin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Hi all!
I am in need of browsing through all the statistics on permutations and
derangements, and wanted to use combinatorial_statistics_in_class, but I
can't find it anymore...
What should I be using?
All the best,
Martin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
I am in need of browsing through all the statistics on permutations and
derangements, and wanted to use combinatorial_statistics_in_class, but I
can't find it anymore...
What should I be using?
Hi Martin --
sage: from sage.combinat.combinatorial_map import combinatorial_maps_in_class
sage:
Hi Christian!
thanks for the fast reply -- but I need statistics, not maps. I..e, I'd
like to have a list of all methods applying to permutations that return a
number...
Is it correct that findstat implements more statistics and more maps? Is
it possible to use findstat from within sage?
Hi Christian,
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:08:14AM +0200, Christian Stump wrote:
Let me add that I was thinking of opening a ticket to remove
combinatorial maps from Sage again (in the medium time future) simply
because the negative comments about it were louder (and I am currently
not
thanks for the fast reply -- but I need statistics, not maps. I..e, I'd like
to have a list of all methods applying to permutations that return a number...
sorry for not properly reading your request! We had, similar to the
@combinatorial_maps decorator, an @combinatorial_statistic decorator
Just so you know, I intend to fix the decorator at some point to reduce
whatever impact it could have (I learned a bit a more about decorator while
at PyCon). We could also think of adding more semantic information to make
the usecase for sage more obvious (I really do think there is one).
Also,
Christian Stump christian.st...@gmail.com writes:
Hi Martin,
one patch per class?
that's completely up to you, I guess
Another question: is it important to keep the number of statistics
small? I.e., if a statistic can be constructed via a map, is it better
*not* to implement it? (Eg.,
sage -combinat qselect
Thanks, I accidentally did sage -qselect instead...
I pushed the changes.
Best, Christian
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sage-combinat-devel group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Hi Martin,
one patch per class?
that's completely up to you, I guess
Another question: is it important to keep the number of statistics
small? I.e., if a statistic can be constructed via a map, is it better
*not* to implement it? (Eg., saliances and right-to-left-minima.)
I usually do
Hello Christian,
I just pushed a change to composition.py which breaks your patch.
Since you are actively working on this, I decided not to rebase your
patch but instead disabled it. It is a very easy rebase in the import
statements.
Also, I disabled Mike's patch, which depends on yours. Please
I just pushed a change to composition.py which breaks your patch.
I rebased the patch and also enabled Mike's patch again. But now, I
get the following error message after applying the queue, so I don't
push the changed...
Any idea (I am using 5.0)?
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Christian Stump
christian.st...@gmail.com wrote:
I just pushed a change to composition.py which breaks your patch.
I rebased the patch and also enabled Mike's patch again. But now, I
get the following error message after applying the queue, so I don't
push the
Hi there!
I'd like to know whether there is a policy, and if so, what it is, on
adding decorators to combinatorial statistics, and also adding
statistics themselves.
Eg., for personal enjoyment, I just added decorators to
number_of_crossings and number_of_nestings in perfect matchings.
Hi Martin.
Eg., for personal enjoyment, I just added decorators to
number_of_crossings and number_of_nestings in perfect matchings.
(Christian: it works now, I made a stupid mistake)
good - any comments are welcome.
I see that there is a patch
concrete_combinatorial_statisics_and_maps_cs.
Christian Stump christian.st...@gmail.com writes:
The decorator is implemented in
combinatorial_statistics_and_maps_decorator-cs.patch, the concrete
examples in the one right after. Please don't modify the later
(concrete_combinatorial_statisics_and_maps_cs.patch) since I am again
and again
38 matches
Mail list logo
