Helloooooooooooooooo !!!
> That's arguable indeed. However I introduced this feature last year
> only, whereas the poset library is four years old. So making this the
> default would break backward compatibility.
I like to break backward compatibility. It makes the user feel like
the software is still being developped !
> Beside, with a facade
> poset, you can't do x<y for x and y two elements of your poset, and
> that's a feature many expect.
Definitely O_o;;;;
> Taken from ``Poset?'':
Aahahahaah. Perfectly right ! Of course I just looked at the INPUT
section, did not find any entry for "facade", and began to complain
immediately :-)
> By the way, please have a look at the comment in ``Poset?'' about
> DiGraph, int's and Integer's (just below the above piece of
> documentation)
Warning: "DiGraph" is used to construct the poset, and the vertices of a
"DiGraph" are converted to plain Python "int"'s if they are
"Integer"'s:
Oh, yeah.... I got used to that. Of course you have to cast them
sometimes, but in exchange the dictionaries are a bit less of a hassle
as their keys are ints. Is that a problem on your side ?
Of course there will be no peace in the graph-theoretical hell until
we have a way to write methods without paying for label that play no
part in them O_o;;;
Nathann
--
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-devel@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.
