Thanks for letting me know. I should improve the code I was running anyway:)
Andrew
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-combinat-devel+un
Hi all,
since Nathann started to "hate" combinatorial map decorators, I think
we can start yet another discussion if we want them or not here on the
mailing list.
I start with Nathann's comment on #14734:
"""
The function's name is way too vague, and I think that it brings
absolutely nothing to
Hi Christian, Nathann, Chris, Viviane, ...
Given that the topic is nontrivial -- if not controversial -- and
given that most of the protagonists are in the same town, I'd
recommend that we use this perfect occasion to have a brainstorm about
it here, say tomorrow. Christian: any chances fo
Hi,
After your discussion, can you please report on your decision (and what led
you to it)?
Thanks,
Paul
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> Hi Christian, Nathann, Chris, Viviane, ...
>
> Given that the topic is nontrivial -- if not controversial -- and
> give
I have been working on free algebras with Sage for a while and I could add
some features that might be useful.
For example, I could implement the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt basis of a free
algebra. To do so, I use the standard factorisation and the Lyndon
factorisation of the word that corresponds
I think I wrote this one thousand times in the sage-devel thread, but
1) I am not against decorators (I hate them, but that's not a sufficient
reason for preventing other people to use them)
2) I am not against find_stat
3) Some of the information that you may add in Sage can be useful (though
u
