Hi all,
Sorry for jumping in late into the discussion. Been crazy those last
days (see my upcoming e-mail for one of the reasons).
Even though I do not yet have convincing arguments, I must say I don't
feel so good with not implementing maps as methods of the domain (in
the parent or element class) or of the codomain (in the parent
class). Weak arguments include:
- It introduces more (too much) complexity; in particular when it
comes to inheriting maps from super classes.
Granted: with all the category tricks, I am not in such a great
position to defend the KISS principle :-)
- One can't use:
sage: W.*tableau*?
to find all methods on W that relate to tableaux (note: this feature
currently only work on the terminal, but it really should also exist
in the notebook)
That being said:
- I would very much favor adding tab completion, in the terminal and
the notebook, on function options (this should be doable). And then
one could have:
sage: p.to_permutation(bijection=<tab>
if not just:
sage: p.to_permutation(<tab>
The bijections themselves could be implemented as:
sage: p._to_permutation_foo()
sage: p._to_permutation_bar()
either in the class or p, or in super class, or some mix thereof.
- I love the idea of having a framework to retrieve and manipulate
(composition, ...) maps between parents. And experiments in that
direction are very welcome.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
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.
