On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:57:57AM -0700, Brant Jones wrote:
I just downloaded the 4.1.1 binary and ran ./sage -combinat install,
so I should be working with a fresh version of everything.
Nevertheless, I still get that the 2 node is connected to the 5 node
in E7 when I run:
C =
Dear Jason, Javier, John,
Thanks all for your feedback and clarification!
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:52:37AM -0700, John H Palmieri wrote:
On Aug 26, 9:30 am, Jason Grout jason-s...@creativetrax.com wrote:
John H Palmieri wrote:
On Aug 26, 6:21 am, Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 08:10:52AM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
Thank you for figuring out what the problem was!! However, did you
push your fix? With all patches applied, I still get the error
and on the patch server I cannot see that you pushed any changes
recently.
That was my fourth
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 08:56:02AM -0700, Paul-Olivier Dehaye wrote:
I followed the instructions from
http://wiki.sagemath.org/combinat/Installation
and ran into a problem (see below for the dump) when installing the
patches on top of a mint 4.1.1. The folder that is looked after
doesn't
Dear Sage-Combinat developers,
New articles citing Sage-Combinat are coming up, so it's way time to
define a standard citation for Sage-Combinat. For effective citation
count, it's best to have a single such citation. On the other hand, we
want to make sure that each developer get
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 03:59:14PM +0200, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
I just build the documentation in the sage-combinat tree and I got the
following warnings. I can not say from which patch it comes but I
guess the author will recognize it.
WARNING:
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 08:52:48PM -0700, Pat LeSmithe wrote:
I'm not an expert, but in case it helps: It seems that pyparsing is
already included with matplotlib. However, the import statement needs
to be qualified:
sage: import matplotlib.pyparsing
Ah ah, thanks much for the
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 09:36:57AM +0200, Kjell Magne Fauske wrote:
Thank you Nicolas for chasing down this bug.
Take it as a self-inflicted punishment for not reading the manual in the first
place :-)
I have made the changes
you suggested:
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 04:59:29PM -0700, Mathieu Guay-Paquet wrote:
I actually tried to report this before the problem was fixed, but it
was my first post to the mailing list, so it was probably held in
moderation for a while. I have just tried with the latest version of
sage-combinat, and
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 04:45:05PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
I get the following error message when applying your patch
(using sage-4.1.1).
Do you still get it? Things apply smoothly for me.
Btw: there is a new guard for the next 4.1.3, so please
sage -combinat qselect if you don't use
Hi Craig and Robert,
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:04:49AM +0200, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 01:40:20AM -0700, Craig Citro wrote:
Okay, I'm attaching a patch for this. I've also uploaded a new spkg at
#5985. With the new spkg and the attached patch, all of
Dear Javier,
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 10:32:30AM -0700, javier wrote:
Somebody could explain why these are different files?
Assuming that by all ideals of a ring R we mean two-sided ideals
(that should go inside the description!) I don't see what is the
difference, for a
Dear Anne, Dan, William, Florent, Jason, ...
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 09:10:24AM -0700, Daniel Bump wrote:
The next Sage version will be 4.2. Send me a list of technical
patches with positive review related to categories, and they can be
the *first* to go in. I also see 4.2 as
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 08:06:00AM -0700, Daniel Bump wrote:
I think it's important that the root system patch get in soon
after the category patches, since it's been holding things up,
some for long amounts of time.
Y
Ticket #3663 is the big crystal patch that
Dear David, dear Javier,
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:23:15PM +0200, David R. Kohel wrote:
I put of positive review of most of the assigned category files.
Excellent! Thanks much!
Note that I hadn't downloaded those attributed to Javier, so these
are still outstanding.
Feel free to
Dear William, dear David, Dear Javier,
Yippee, there remains essentially only eight categories left to review!
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:04:45AM +0200, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:23:15PM +0200, David R. Kohel wrote:
I put of positive review of most of the
Dear David, dear Robert,
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 02:53:41PM -0700, David Kohel wrote:
If I understand what existed and what is proposed,
(for short, and semantically speaking, the current Groupoid is exactly
what existed before)
then I vote for the category Groupoids() and no
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:35:09PM -0400, Jason Bandlow wrote:
I really want to see categories get in, and I really want that
process to not screw up symmetric functions. :)
Eh eh, I knew I had some edge on this one :-)
(hmm, I am not sure this is a correct English translation of what I
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 07:45:14AM -0700, David Kohel wrote:
I don't have a strong opinion whether OrderedSets
(or Monoids) should have total or partial ordering.
However, since there is a possible ambiguity, my
preference is to not use OrderedX as an alias for
either PartiallyOrderedX or
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 03:19:17PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
I wanted to give you a quick update on the status of my review. First,
I haven't been able to look at it as closely as I wanted--Jessica went
to the hospital of Friday with a blood clot, and that pretty much
dominated my
Hi Andrew,
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 03:09:37AM -0800, Andrew Mathas wrote:
I'm having problems again in upgrading sage.
In an attempt to fix them
I did a fresh install but it is still failing.
Is it some quirk of my system or are others having problems?
Hmm. In principle, things
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 02:24:32PM +0100, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
Finally, I just removed the 4_2_1 guard since sage-4.2.1 doesn't exist yet!
When should we add the new x_y_z guard for the first time to avoid this
problem?
Just leave them. It's better to add this information as soon as a
Hi Anders,
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 12:24:33PM -0500, Anders Skovsted Buch wrote:
This looks great, thanks a lot for your careful description!! Looks
like FreeAlgebra might be a good destination for porting my quantum
calculator code if I ever get time.
:-)
There are a couple of
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 03:41:43PM -0500, Anders Skovsted Buch wrote:
Ok, no problem. But in order to translate the giambelli() function,
it needs to be able to return a polynomial in variables taken from
the infinite set, e.g. {s[1], s[2], s[3], ...}. Is this possible?
When I ported the
On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 11:38:32PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
This is a (conditional) positive review for #6137. The review is of the
code at
http://combinat.sagemath.org/patches/file/tip/categories-sf-6137-nt.patch
applied to 4.1.2. Obviously, the issues with 4.2 need to be
resolved
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 01:13:07PM +0100, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
- Once again, the coercion mechanism was not recognizing the left and
right multiplication of coefficients on CombinatorialFreeModules.
sage: h = CombinatorialFreeModule(QQ, [1,2,3])
sage: h.get_action(QQ)
Dear Sage-Combinat and root system developers,
Some good news: Christophe Hohlweg and a student of him are going to
join us for more root system fun (porting Christophe's Cambrian code)!
Cheers,
Nicolas
- Forwarded message from Nicolas M. Thiery
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:54:03AM -0800, javier wrote:
Here is an updated short status report for the category code. All test
pass now on 4.2! Here is what remains to be done:
- A positive review on Rings (David K.? Javier?)
Done and passed.
Great, thanks!
While browsing the code
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:55:16PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
I looked at
http://combinat.sagemath.org/hgwebdir.cgi/code/file/tip/sage/categories/number_fields.py
and it looks good to me.
Thanks!
- Final comments on Groupoid (Robert)
That's the only one remaining!
- A positive
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:20:34AM +0100, Florent hivert wrote:
combinat.sagemath.org/code and /doc are now up to date!
I was browsing on /doc in particular in the documentation of the
categories. I must says that though it's still draft, it already looks pretty
good. However, I can't find
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 04:26:05PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
The status is listed here:
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/query?status=positive_reviewstatus=needs_workstatus=needs_reviewstatus=needs_infostatus=newgroup=statusmilestone=sage-4.2.1
Thanks!
On sage-release I went
Hi Jason!
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 09:27:50PM +0100, Nicolas Thiéry wrote:
On Mon, Nov 02, 2009 at 03:19:17PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
I wanted to give you a quick update on the status of my review. First,
I haven't been able to look at it as closely as I wanted--Jessica went
Dear category fans,
Latest status report for the category patches:
- They apply smoothly on 4.2.1 alpha0, with all test passing :-)
(This is on a macbook pro ubuntu 9.4 with everything up to
sage-4.3.patch in the Sage-Combinat queue)
Mike: could you please run the tests on a
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:14:06PM +0100, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
A basic example from statistics which I like for its simplicity :
{{{
sage: marks = [1, 4, 2, 5.65, 3, 2.28] # the marks of my students
sage: mean = sum(marks) / len(marks)
sage: print mean
2.988333
sage: variance
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 10:35:28AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
Mike Hansen and I have finished sage-4.2.1:
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/wstein/farm/src/sage-4.2.1.tar
Release notes, binaries, the above being posted online, etc., will
follow in due course.
Thanks!
sage -clone
Dear Florent, dear Mike,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 09:49:06AM +0100, Florent hivert wrote:
With the forthcoming bunch of sage-combinat patches, to test a parent we call
sage: TestSuite(P).run()
which by default returns nothing if everything is ok and raise an
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 07:36:58AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
I think it is ridiculous to have doctests of the form
sage:sga = SymmetricGroup(3)
sage: TestSuite(sga).run(verbose=True)
running ._test_an_element() .. done
running ._test_associativity() .. done
Dear Mike, dear Dan,
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:25:41AM +0700, Mike Hansen wrote:
I ran some tests with all of the category patches, and there are a few
issues that need to be cleaned up before merging. Most of them only
show up when doctesting with -long (the standard option when
Dear category fans, dear Sage-Combinat developers,
This is my final status report for the category patches:
Yiiippeee!
Mike just merged them today in Sage 4.3-alpha0, together with one year
of hard work worth of feature-full patches around
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 01:29:16AM -0800, Nathann Cohen wrote:
Here it is !! :-)
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7492
Cool, thanks!
I would return the result as an element of:
CombinatorialFreeModule(Permutations(n), F)
where n is the size of the matrix, and F its ground
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 08:59:17PM +0100, Florent hivert wrote:
My (obvious) suggestion is to add at the end of a function doc (close to
reference) a section e.g.:
ALGORITHM:
- modified merge sort algorithm. The complexity ``O(n * ln(n))`` is
optimal however it has a bad
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:22:25PM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
I am doing some calculations in Iwahori Hecke algebras.
By this I mean the deformation of the group algebra of
a Weyl group in which the generators corresponding to
the simple reflections satisfy t_alpha^2=(q-1)*t_alpha+q,
where q
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 07:11:37AM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
Yes, http://wiki.sagemath.org/HeckeAlgebras is exactly what we
need. These are so fundamental that they should be in Sage.
Definitely.
I think rewriting from scratch an implementation of the generic Hecke
algebra in the T_w
Dear Mike!
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:18:13AM +0700, Mike Hansen wrote:
Sage 4.3.rc0 is out. Source and binary are available at
Cool! I can't wait for 4.3!
Oh one thing: since we got hurt by it in 4.2.1: could we add to the
release check list that `sage -combinat install` should work
Dear Dan,
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 08:53:27AM -0800, bump wrote:
Here is the patch:
http://sporadic.stanford.edu/bump/patches/bruhat_order.patch
You use it like this:
W = WeylGroup(E6)
W.bruhat_ordered(x,y)
where x and y are Weyl group elements. It returns true if x=y.
Ah
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 02:33:29PM -0800, Mike Hansen wrote:
I also have my wrapping of Coxeter3 that I recently started to clean
up to make a proper spkg. That exposes Hecke algebras, Bruhat
interval-related code, and the KL polynomials. It's my goal to have
something soon.
Cool! I can't
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 03:56:17PM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
Ah ah, an excellent occasion to exercise an old idea of mine to solve
generically this kind of issue. Please give a try to the attached
patch add_cache-nt.patch (it requires the category patches; I'll put
it into the
Dear Dan, dear Sage developers,
Sage developers: please see the first point below.
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 09:22:03PM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
I have what seems to be a working patch to compute
Kazhdan Lusztig polynomials at:
Dear Sage-Combinat devs,
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 07:42:21AM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
... about shorthands:
-
We have had repeated (and strong!) requests from users of symmetric
functions for a one liner for getting the usual shortcuts for all the
classical
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 02:01:22PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
I stumbled recently into a nifty feature of the IPython interpreter
allowing for easy manipulations of the global namespace of the
interpreter, at the python level. Thanks to it, one can now do:
sage: S =
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 02:37:22PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery
nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 02:01:22PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
I stumbled recently into a nifty feature of the IPython interpreter
allowing
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 09:36:25PM -0800, bump wrote:
One can compute the Bruhat interval in cases where u - v in the
notation of Kazhdan-Lusztig. (Here - is an approximation to the
LaTeX symbol $\prec$.) So for example, if for A3 you compute
the Bruhat interval [s2, s2 s1 s3 s2] that is a
Hi Dan!
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 02:54:08PM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
I was unable to get a working combinat queue. With sage-4.3.alpha1
I get errors in trac_7420-fix-infinite-coercion-discovery-loop.patch.
Oops. Hopeful the guards are fixed now.
I did however make a trac ticket:
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 02:41:01AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
Merry Christmas! I have released sage-4.3, which is a massive
release with 230 tickets closed
Yippee!
What an exquisite Christmas gift for the Sage-Combinat team :-)
We are glad not to have to worry about this pile of patches
Dear William, dear symmetric function fans,
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 02:59:18PM -0800, William Stein wrote:
sage: sage.misc.misc.inject_variables(dict('a':1, 'b':3))
sage: a
1
sage: b
3
That sounds very good.
Up to little changes, patch up on #7776
Since we
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 02:49:15PM -0500, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 7:45 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
What precisely is a shorthand? It seems like a bad name.
Maybe
sage: S.inject_elements()
or
sage: S.inject_special_elements()
or something?
On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 11:01:08AM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
I just saw this on sage-support and am bumping it to the sage-combinat
list, where someone might have an answer.
Thanks Jason!
Dear Barry,
Original Message
Subject: Recovering permutations from poset elements
Dear Victor,
I am bouncing your e-mail to sage-devel, since for historical reasons
that's where graph stuff is usually discussed.
Best,
Nicolas
On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 10:23:05AM -0800, VictorMiller wrote:
I would like the following enhancements
Dear Sage-Combinat developers!
I folded together the backward compatibility patches for Sage 4.2.1
and Sage 4.3. I also removed those for Sage 4.2. In other words,
Sage = 4.2 (dating back from October) is now required to install the
Sage-Combinat patches. I updated the wiki
On Sun, Jan 03, 2010 at 10:47:49AM -0800, Kazuo Thow wrote:
Kevin Clark and I, both of us undergraduates at UW, are working on a
joint project to improve the graph theory features.
That's excellent!
Over the next few months we'll be looking through books and papers
on graph drawing, and
Dear Andrew, Anne, Brant, Dan,
On Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 10:12:45PM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
I have revised both the Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomial and Iwahori
Hecke algebra patches and reposted them on the trac server.
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7729
Dear colleague,
This is the first announcement for the conference to be held at CIRM,
Marseille, France, from February 22, 2010 to February 26, 2010.
++
| Sage Days 20 |
++
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 02:39:33PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
When specifying both parameters q1=q2=0, should one obtain the
nilCoxeter algebra, so s1^2=0? However, the code seems to give:
sage: R = IwahoriHeckeAlgebraT(A3,0,0,prefix = s)
sage: [s1,s2,s3] = R.algebra_generators()
sage:
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 03:11:13PM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 02:39:33PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
When specifying both parameters q1=q2=0, should one obtain the
nilCoxeter algebra, so s1^2=0? However, the code seems to give:
sage: R = IwahoriHeckeAlgebraT
On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 09:09:36PM -0800, bump wrote:
By [Kac, Proposition 6.5] the affine Weyl group is a semidirect
product of the finite Weyl group and translations in the coroot lattice.
The extended affine Weyl group uses the coweight lattice instead.
Elements in the extended affine
Dear Dan,
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 07:11:09AM -0800, bump wrote:
Ok, glad to see that we agree. Actually, we want to accept a Coxeter
group I think. I'll do that today.
OK.
Done an reposted.
For the record: the category/free_module refactorization allowed to
get rid of about 200
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 08:36:38AM -0800, Daniel Bump wrote:
For the record: the category/free_module refactorization allowed to
get rid of about 200 lines out of 700. Those were mostly lines of
code; I kept all the doctests. Now that you have seen how this works,
how would you feel doing
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 05:56:07PM +0100, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
Dear Nicolas,
A recent changes created a conflict in the sage-combinat tree. It is
either me or you...but I think it is you!
Oops! Fixed!
Sincèrement,
Sébastien
Hey Jason,
It's good to hear from you. Happy new year!
In fact, I was about to send you an e-mail for two things :-)
- Warn you about the rebase + little fixes in
triangular-morphisms-jb.patch and ask you about your time-line for
finalizing it.
- Ask whether you could review
Dear Tim,
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:58:23PM +0800, Tim Joseph Dumol wrote:
I've been wondering why sage.combinat.combinat.combinations still exists,
when sage.combinat.combination.Combinations is much faster, being native
Sage code, and thus not requiring GAP interfacing
Hi Jason!
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 12:19:36PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
While working on this, I added a ``TestSuite(phi)`` test where ``phi``
is a TriangularModuleMorphism, mimicking what was done for
DiagonalModuleMorphism.
Good idea!
Unfortunately, pickling fails. I don't
Hi Jason,
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 06:05:06PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
- self._monomial_coefficients is specific to the
CombinatorialFreeModule implementation. But you can use directly
x[k] to get the coefficient of k in an element x of a module with
basis.
Very
Hi Anne,
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 11:49:38PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
I recently asked Nicolas whether it is easy to amend the Iwahori Hecke
algebra code to mod out by further relations? For example to impose
T_i T_{i+1} T_i = 0 or something like this. He suggested to discuss this
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 05:08:13PM +0100, Sébastien Labbé wrote:
I am currently experiencing a small conflict in the sage-combinat
tree. See below for the content of the reject file.
Please try again after a sage -combinat qselect. The iwahori hecke
patch and a couple others are already guarded
Hi,
Given the recent discussion on adding generic group features, it was
way time for someone to go one step further: to enable extension types
to inherit code from categories, so that we could at last start to
systematically put generic code in the categories instead of the old
abstract
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 04:04:59PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
Well, it seems sage-devel approves, so term = coeff * monomial it is.
Adjugé, vendu!
Thanks for handling this.
I've spent today preparing a patch to do this, and I think I've done it.
I have to run now, but tomorrow I'll put up a
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 04:05:29PM -0800, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I actually went to that ticket a bit ago, but didn't see any patch
attached. I'll certainly review this during Sage days if no one else
beats me to it.
Excellent!
For the record: all tests passed this night on my machine with
Hi Jason!
Thanks for handling this so promptly and to the full length!
I haven't tried your code yet. Were you able to make it so that F.term
and F.monomial can be temporarily used interchangeably (thanks to
default values) to smooth out the transition?
Cheers,
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 12:02:05PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
I posted a positive review on the trac server.
Thanks much!
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry Isil nthi...@users.sf.net
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message because you are
Hi Jason!
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:47:01PM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
I now have a patch up at
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7914
A couple details; could you:
- rename the patch in the queue as on trac
- Add a description to the top of the patch (for example
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:32:52PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
Nicolas:
j-trivial-nt.patch: Fix patch added to queue
semigroups_and_algebras-nt.patch: Fix patch added to queue
Folded. Florent: I let you finish to fold all the j-trivial patches
together.
Cheers,
Dear Sage and Sage-Combinat devs,
I just updated http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/wiki/SageCombinatRoadMap
to reflect the big pile of work that has been done in 2009. I
certainly have forgotten things; in particular, I did not list
anything about words and the like. Please edit further!
I
Dear Sage/Sage-combinat devs,
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:40:18AM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
* #7980: Extract basic support for the concrete representation of an
abstract algebra relation out of the ncsf patch (Jason?)
This is a concept that we have used much in MuPAD-Combinat
Hi Jason,
Thanks for creating the ticket (and for pointing out the tab issue)!
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 01:07:19PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
I know what code should be moved, but I don't know exactly where to put
it, or if there is more that should be included. Suggestions? (Feel
Hi!
I just rebased the Sage-Combinat patch queue for 4.3.1. In principle,
it should still work on 4.3. Let me know in case of trouble!
Jason: I rebased and reposted your #7938 (swap term-monomials).
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry Isil
Hi Sage-Word!
For the record, I get words doctests failures with the following
patches applied (I assume 7520 or 7618 are the culprits):
zephyr-~shg qapplied
trac_7976-classcall_no_inherits-fh.patch
trac_7976-classcall_no_inherits-review-nt.patch
On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 06:14:59PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
Thank you for the further cleanup. One immediate problem is that it causes the
patch affine-E-as.patch to fail.
Ooops, I should have checked that. I am adding a +crystal guard on my
patch until the other patches are rebased. I
Hi Dan!
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 08:23:40AM -0800, bump wrote:
Anne just finalized an old patch of ours doing some cleanup on
crystals (comparisons, latex, fixing the tabs as Jason pointed out, ...).
I did some further cleanup today (see log below). It's currently on
the patch
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 09:42:02AM -0800, bump wrote:
Only one patch trac_7978_fix_tabs_in_affine_py-jb.patch is
on the trac server. I understand the patches you are
referring to are in the combinat queue but not on the
trac server. And from the messages, they are still
being tweaked.
Can
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 06:41:20PM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
This is a friendly review request. :)
:-)
Thanks for your work! I'll look at this soon.
One question I have... I noticed the following test in the __init__ of
ModuleMorphismByLinearity:
{{{
sage:
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 08:56:50AM +1100, Minh Nguyen wrote:
I have no problem with that form. Either something like
trac wxyz: description
or this
#wxyz: description
is OK by me. Some people even put the ticket number at the end of the
description, or somewhere within the
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 01:01:44PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
Should
direct_sum_of_crystals
be a method similar to
TensorProductOfCrystals?
Then the input would be a list of crystals (B_1,...,B_n) whose direct sum one
takes.
I suppose the elements would then be stored as tuple
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 02:27:50PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
Should direct_sum_of_crystals be a method similar to
TensorProductOfCrystals?
Then the input would be a list of crystals (B_1,...,B_n) whose direct sum
one takes.
I suppose the elements would then be stored as tuple
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:10:46AM -0500, Jason Bandlow wrote:
I am indifferent to the choice of convention. I agree that the conflict
you point out is disturbing. My choice for using the smallest support
was based on the current behavior of printing in sage (for most
combinatorics).
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 02:25:30PM +0100, Florent hivert wrote:
I seem that you messed things up with the classcall patches. I have
rejections... Did you forget so commit / push ?
As far as I unserstood you folded my patch and forgot to commit its removal. I
marked it as guarded. Please
Hello Florent,
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 06:09:12PM +0100, Florent hivert wrote:
They both are 2 month old (version 4.2 of sage) which is not very good. As far
as I remember Mike took care or building those. By the way thanks for this. Is
this true ? If so Mike how did you set-up those ?
Hi!
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 12:53:43PM -0500, David Joyner wrote:
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Minh Nguyen nguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Florent,
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 4:25 AM, Florent Hivert
florent.hiv...@univ-rouen.fr wrote:
SNIP
Should we put there our
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 09:53:27AM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
I would like to write a symmetric polynomial (not function)
in terms of one of the usual bases (like Schur polynomials).
For example, I would like to write
sage: n=2
sage: P = PolynomialRing(QQ, 'x', n)
sage: x=[P.gen(i) for
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 02:11:01PM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote:
Just for the record, here is the corrected function from
yesterday
def from_polynomial(f):
m = SFAMonomial(f.base_ring())
n = f.parent().ngens()
x = f.parent().gens()
exp = [list(p) for p in
Hi Sébastien,
I just went through the patch. It sounds good! What about having a
common super class for all the concrete word classes (list/tuple/str)
which would contain all the shared logic about how finite words
interact together?
The two following design decisions will probably
1 - 100 of 1139 matches
Mail list logo
