> 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.