> Granted: there should be an abstract class for word-like objects (or > more possibly generally objects with labels), and this method should > be implemented there. But in the mean time just leave it there.
Note that the terminology is not uniform. Among others * evaluation * Parikh vector * Abelianization * number of occurences of letters * ... see [1] It would be nice that we have a convention for that. Should we put all of .evaluation(), .parikh_vector() and .abelianization() in the namespace of a word-like object ? Which one should be the prefered one ? [1] http://wiki.sagemath.org/LanguagesAndTilings#Parikh_vector.2C_evaluation.2C_abelianization Best, Vincent -- 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.
