Hi Eviatar and Nicolas, > Speaking of which, one question for the sage-word people: should De > Bruijn sequences be output as Words?
I believe so. Well, if we want to get things similar together. Many infinite sequences have already been implemented. They are available here (or in sage/combinat/words/word_generators.py) : sage: words.[TAB] Object returned are sequences (or infinite words over a given alphabet). They are slice-able and many other methods for infinite words have been implemented. Infinite words can be coded by an iterator or a function N -> Alphabet. Examples are in the following file : sage/combinat/words/word_generator.py. What do you think? Maybe we could rename "words" by "sequences" , "sequencesBank" or something. > Should the set of all De Bruijn > sequences be a Language? Languages are being implemented in the sage-combinat branch by Vincent and me. But we use the definition : "the set of factors of a word, where factor means a finite sequence of consecutive letters". Cheers, Sébastien -- 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.
