[sage-combinat-devel] Sage-Combinat on Sage 5.0.beta6

2012-03-06 Thread Nicolas M. Thiery
Dear Sage-Combinat developers, I updated the guards to mark the patches merged in the latest Sage developers release 5.0.beta6. The queue seems to apply smoothly there, and should still apply on vanilla 4.8, 5.0.beta5, and maybe 4.7.2. Cheers, Nicolas -- Ni

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Sage-Combinat on Sage 5.0.beta6

2012-03-06 Thread Christian Stump
> I updated the guards to mark the patches merged in the latest Sage > developers release 5.0.beta6. The queue seems to apply smoothly there, > and should still apply on vanilla 4.8, 5.0.beta5, and maybe 4.7.2. Thanks Nicolas! I just compiled 5.0.beta6 last night and saw that the queue does not ap

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Sage-Combinat on Sage 5.0.beta4 and updated sage-combinat script

2012-03-06 Thread Nicolas M. Thiery
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 02:35:58PM +, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > I'm a bit stuck by the procedure after hg merge. vi opens with three > windows. The one on the left is clearly what remains at the end, the > one in the middle should be the one from the update and the one on the > right the origi

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] [sage-devel] Bug with Schubert polynomials?

2012-03-06 Thread Nicolas M. Thiery
Dear Viviane, On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:39:39PM +0100, Viviane Pons wrote: >About your bug, I don't know if someone is looking after >SchubertPolynomialRing, from what I see it is mostly sent to symmetrica. Thanks for investigating. This sounds right: Symmetrica is extremely sen

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: cores and partitions

2012-03-06 Thread Nicolas M. Thiery
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 02:58:58PM +, Vincent Delecroix wrote: > 2012/3/1, Anne Schilling : > > Now Mike pointed out further that whether an element needs to be typed or > > not to be in the set is rather arbitrary: > > > > sage: [3,1,2] in Compositions() > > True > > sage: [1,2,3,4] in Words()

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: cores and partitions

2012-03-06 Thread Anne Schilling
Thanks! Which convention should we use though for the new code on k-tableaux? I would say we should adopt (2), but then the behavior of k-tableaux would be different from Tableaux (which uses convention (1)). Best, Anne On 3/6/12 7:05 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 02:58:

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: cores and partitions

2012-03-06 Thread Nicolas M. Thiery
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote: > Thanks! Which convention should we use though for the new code on k-tableaux? > I would say we should adopt (2), but then the behavior of k-tableaux would be > different from Tableaux (which uses convention (1)). Good question. In

[sage-combinat-devel] Re: sage queue does not apply

2012-03-06 Thread Travis Scrimshaw
Eclipse with the PyDev plug-in. Travis On Mar 5, 11:59 pm, "Nicolas M. Thiery" wrote: > On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 10:47:48PM -0800, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > >    Sorry about that, my editor did that automatically. > > Ah, good to know. Used appropriately, this is a cool feature. Which > editor i

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] Re: cores and partitions

2012-03-06 Thread Anne Schilling
On 3/6/12 8:32 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 07:38:14AM -0800, Anne Schilling wrote: >> Thanks! Which convention should we use though for the new code on k-tableaux? >> I would say we should adopt (2), but then the behavior of k-tableaux would be >> different from Tableaux

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] comments/questions on poset code

2012-03-06 Thread Anne Schilling
Hi All! Is there any volunteer to review http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12536 ? Thanks! Anne -- 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 unsu