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.

Reply via email to