Hi Simon,
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 03:18:59PM +, Simon King wrote:
Let me try to rephrase the question: Since we already have DiGraph, why should
we have *two* separate classes, namely for quiver-the-digraph and for
quiver-the-associative-magma? Why not just use DiGraph for
Hi Nicolas,
On 2013-05-01, Nicolas M. Thiery nicolas.thi...@u-psud.fr wrote:
I definitely see your point about not multiplying the number of
classes for no reason. The executive summary of the rant below is: I
am very happy with your proposal; just don't call the parent of the
paths Quiver
Hi Simon,
On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 03:44:06PM +, Simon King wrote:
and don't have PathMonoid inherit from DiGraph.
Why? If it does, then a PathMonoid can immediately tell you its
vertices, connectedness, it can show itself, etc.
Yup. But then you have an object that bears
Hi Travis,
I think you broke the queue with sage-5.9.rc1. Could you please fix it
immediately since we are working
on patches. Perhaps you could put your patches further down in the queue to
avoid
these issues?
applying disable_lazy_import_warning-nt.patch
applying
