Hi Nicolas,
On Mar 3, 6:44 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:56:45AM -0800, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> > I would appreciate some input on the following ticket
> >http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10809
> > which constructs Cartesian produc
Hi Nicolas,
On Mar 3, 7:00 am, "Nicolas M. Thiery"
wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 01:30:03PM -0800, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> > While writing an enhancement proposal on
> >http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10777
> > I thought that it could be convenient to creat
"Nicolas M. Thiery" writes:
> If I add the following line to your function so that the small graphs
> are drawn by dot2tex instead:
>
> G[1].set_latex_options(format="dot2tex", prog="circo")
>
> then I get a reasonable picture (attached).
awesome!!!
Is there a way to make the graphs (i.e.,
Hi!
Is it easy to specify with the new graph code in which
direction arrows in a graph go? For example, in crystal graphs they
usually go down, but would it be easy to say they should go to the right?
Thanks,
Anne
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"s
Hi Martin, hi Robert Beezer,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:55:47PM +0100, Martin Rubey wrote:
> Sorry, again I was not precise enough: the problem was only with the
> LaTeX display. (I found the workaround.)
>
> Here is a complete example. Please load the attached poset with
>
> P=load("
Hi Andrey,
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 01:30:03PM -0800, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> While writing an enhancement proposal on
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10777
> I thought that it could be convenient to create a (finite) poset
> without specifying its elements but perhaps addin
Hi Andrey,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:56:45AM -0800, Andrey Novoseltsev wrote:
> I would appreciate some input on the following ticket
> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10809
> which constructs Cartesian products of toric varieties as a new toric
> variety (without remembering "t
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 04:21:39PM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> Ah ah! There is no change indeed; but as far as I remember, the
> sage-combinat script looks at the *output* of sage -hg status to check
> that there is indeed no change; I bet it is confused by this "Detected
> SAGE64 flag" messa
