Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

One more question: the algorithm only works for finite posets. Shall this be specified in the documentation? Anne On 5/23/12 11:40 AM, Anne Schilling wrote: > Hello Darij, > > Thank you for your work on this. I modified your code slightly and > added some additional documentation (indicating wha

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hello Darij, Thank you for your work on this. I modified your code slightly and added some additional documentation (indicating what happens when there are several components). The patch is now on the sage-combinat queue and on http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12993 Franco or Christian

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hello all, Thanks for the comments, Franco and Anne. I've updated http://mit.edu/~darij/www/rf.txt (all of Franco's comments implemented). What I still don't like about my code is that it recomputes the whole function every time I call it. I assume caching the rank_function method wouldn't be of

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Anne Schilling wrote: > Hi Franco and Darij and ..., > Hello Anne, Darij, On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Darij Grinberg >>> > wrote:     Hi Anne,     > For a finite poset perhaps the easiest would

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Franco and Darij and ..., >>> Hello Anne, Darij, >>> >>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Darij Grinberg >> > wrote: >>> >>> Hi Anne, >>> >>> > For a finite poset perhaps the easiest would be to >>> > >>> > - start with a random element in the pos

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hello Anne, On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:43 AM, Anne Schilling wrote: > > On 5/22/12 6:17 PM, Franco Saliola wrote: > > > > Hello Anne, Darij, > > > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Darij Grinberg > > wrote: > > > >     Hi Anne, > > > >     > For a finite poset per

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

On 5/22/12 6:17 PM, Franco Saliola wrote: > > Hello Anne, Darij, > > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Darij Grinberg > wrote: > > Hi Anne, > > > For a finite poset perhaps the easiest would be to > > > > - start with a random element in the poset

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Darij, >> Did you make the changes in the source code? Then you can just do >> >> sage -br > > Thanks - I got that wrong (thought this is what upgrade would do)! >> >> and test your function. >> >> If you are happy with your changes and want to put them under mercurial >> "supervision" >> do

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Darij-- I think this means that the version of hg which you are using is too old. Sage includes an installation of hg, which you can access via "sage -hg". (So the easiest thing to do is to replace "hg" with "sage -hg" each time in Anne's instructions. Or you could install a more recent v

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hello Anne, Darij, On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Darij Grinberg wrote: > Hi Anne, > > > For a finite poset perhaps the easiest would be to > > > > - start with a random element in the poset, assign rank 0 > > - look at all covers and cocovers and assign the rank according to the > > recurrenc

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Anne, > Did you make the changes in the source code? Then you can just do > > sage -br Thanks - I got that wrong (thought this is what upgrade would do)! > > and test your function. > > If you are happy with your changes and want to put them under mercurial > "supervision" > do > > hg qnew ra

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Darij, >> For a finite poset perhaps the easiest would be to >> >> - start with a random element in the poset, assign rank 0 >> - look at all covers and cocovers and assign the rank according to the >> recurrence rank(x) = rank(y) + 1 if x covers y. >> - repeat with the new elements >> - if at

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Anne, > For a finite poset perhaps the easiest would be to > > - start with a random element in the poset, assign rank 0 > - look at all covers and cocovers and assign the rank according to the >  recurrence rank(x) = rank(y) + 1 if x covers y. > - repeat with the new elements > - if at any poi

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

On 5/21/12 8:09 AM, Darij Grinberg wrote: > Hi Anne, > >> Isn't the following a big bug in posets in sage: >> >> sage: P = Poset(([1,2,3,4],[[1,4],[2,3],[3,4]]), facade = True) >> sage: P.is_graded() >> False >> >> The definition of grading is that all maximal chains of every interval >> have the

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi Anne, > Isn't the following a big bug in posets in sage: > > sage: P = Poset(([1,2,3,4],[[1,4],[2,3],[3,4]]), facade = True) > sage: P.is_graded() > False > > The definition of grading is that all maximal chains of every interval > have the same length. This is given in the above poset, but sag

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

On 5/21/12 8:11 AM, Christian Stump wrote: >> The definition of grading is that all maximal chains of every interval >> have the same length. This is given in the above poset, but sage says >> it is not graded. > > The problem here is what people consider a "rank function" on a poset. > Do we want

Re: [sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

> The definition of grading is that all maximal chains of every interval > have the same length. This is given in the above poset, but sage says > it is not graded. The problem here is what people consider a "rank function" on a poset. Do we want that all minimal elements have value 0 ? Then your

[sage-combinat-devel] bug in poset

Hi! Isn't the following a big bug in posets in sage: sage: P = Poset(([1,2,3,4],[[1,4],[2,3],[3,4]]), facade = True) sage: P.is_graded() False The definition of grading is that all maximal chains of every interval have the same length. This is given in the above poset, but sage says it is not gr