Hi Travis, I have twos questions about the order options that have appeared in your partition clean-ups.
The easy one first: should the reverse ordering also exist? That is, "reverse lex", "reverse dominance", "reverse containment"? If people agree that it is worth including these explicitly it would be good if there was a systematic way to organise all of the orderings...will let you know if I come up with something. The second question is harder: is it intended that, ultimately, the order in which the partitions are generated by the iterator will be compatible with the order on the parent? If the ordering is part of the parent then I think that this is a reasonable expectation but, of course, it would be painful implement. What do people think is the "ideal" way this should work for any parent that comes equipped with an (optionable) ordering? Cheers, Andrew -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-combinat-devel/-/wjZucoM2tB8J. 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.