> Dan: given the amount of change, let me know if it's best to keep the
> reviewer's patch separated, or to fold the two of them before you
> review my changes.
The reviewer patch is big enough that I need to study the changes,
so let's keep them separated for now.
About the tests, I several times saw that minor changes
can change the order in which things are printed, viz.
Expected:
q*T1*T2*T1*T0 + (q-1)*T1*T2*T0*T1*T0
Got:
(q-1)*T1*T2*T0*T1*T0 + q*T1*T2*T1*T0
This changed a few times when I was working on both patches
simultaneously. I don't know the reason for that.
I suppose one solution would be to have __repr__ sort the keys.
This problem must come up in other contexts, e.g. polynomial
or Laurent polynomial rings. Is there a standard solution to this?
Dan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-de...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
