Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
>
> Please use sage 4.1.2 for the review. That's the rebasing issue we are
> having with 4.2!
Ah, ok, I will. Thanks!
-Jason
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combina
Hi Jason,
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 05:59:44PM -0400, Jason Bandlow wrote:
> I'm having a little trouble... I performed the following steps on sage.math:
>
> $ sage-combinat upgrade# No reported errors
> $ hg qpush categories-sf-6137-nt.patch # No reported errors
> $ sage -br combinat
Hi Nicolas,
I'm having a little trouble... I performed the following steps on sage.math:
$ sage-combinat upgrade# No reported errors
$ hg qpush categories-sf-6137-nt.patch # No reported errors
$ sage -br combinat # No reported errors
sage: SF = SymmetricFunctions(QQ)
sage: s = SF.s(); h = SF
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 02:33:04AM -0700, javier wrote:
>
>
>
> On Oct 29, 12:38 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
> wrote:
> > Again, that's just how it used to be. Do we have an agreement for
> > having both:
> >
> > PartiallyOrderedSets()
> > TotallyOrderedSets()
> >
> > I haven't Wik
On Oct 29, 12:38 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> Again, that's just how it used to be. Do we have an agreement for
> having both:
>
> PartiallyOrderedSets()
> TotallyOrderedSets()
>
> I haven't Wikipedia under hand. But since an OrderedMonoid is a
> partially ordered set there,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:35:09PM -0400, Jason Bandlow wrote:
> I really want to see categories get in, and I really want that
> process to not screw up symmetric functions. :)
Eh eh, I knew I had some edge on this one :-)
(hmm, I am not sure this is a correct English translation of what I mean
