On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 07:07:44AM -0500, Christian Stump wrote:
> This gives the poset as well upside down.
In waiting for something better, you can do:
sage: P = Posets(5).random_element()
sage: G = P.hasse_diagram()
sage: G.set_latex_options(format="dot2tex", edge_options = lambda
> This gives the poset as well upside down.
>
This is the "Florent Hivert convention" :-p
Nathann
--
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 sag
> latex or plot drawing?
Do you mean something like
sage: H = P.hasse_diagram()
sage: H.set_latex_options(format='dot2tex', prog='dot', layout='acyclic')
sage: view(H)
This gives the poset as well upside down.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 05:11:44AM -0500, Christian Stump wrote:
> Does anyone know if there is an easy way to draw posets from bottom to
> top as we had it a while ago?
latex or plot drawing?
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil"
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
Yo
Hi,
Does anyone know if there is an easy way to draw posets from bottom to
top as we had it a while ago?
Cheers, Christian
--
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,
Hello !!!
Of course, their should be an entry for facade in the INPUT. Patch
> welcome :-)
>
Well, it's your turn now -->
http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12961
Tell me if the doc I added is somehow misleading when you know what you are
talking about :-D
Well, this forced me to
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 04:26:15PM +0200, Nathann Cohen wrote:
> Aahahahaah. Perfectly right ! Of course I just looked at the INPUT
> section, did not find any entry for "facade", and began to complain
> immediately :-)
Of course, their should be an entry for facade in the INPUT. Patch
welcome :-)
Hell !!!
> That's arguable indeed. However I introduced this feature last year
> only, whereas the poset library is four years old. So making this the
> default would break backward compatibility.
I like to break backward compatibility. It makes the user feel like
the software is
Salut Nathann!
>I would personnally expect this to be the default behaviour,
That's arguable indeed. However I introduced this feature last year
only, whereas the poset library is four years old. So making this the
default would break backward compatibility. Beside, with a facade
pose
Hell !!!
What happens if you add facade=True ?
>
It works ! ;-)
sage: p = [1,2,3,4,5]
sage: P = Poset( (p, lambda x,y:x,
,
,
,
]
sage: P = Poset( (p, lambda x,y:x, ,
, ,
]
I would personnally expect this to be the default behaviour, especially
when the document
> But come on Just look at that !!!
> sage: P = Poset( (range(len(p)), comparison) )
What happens if you add facade=True ?
> sage: P = Poset( (range(len(p)), comparison), facade=True )
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group
Hello everybody !!!
The french speakers who read the other post in this forum already know that
I am having a hard time with posets, and it may very well be my fault.
But come on Just look at that !!!
--
sage: Permutations(10).random_element()
[9, 2, 6, 7, 5, 4, 10, 8, 1, 3]
sage
> Or more generally, let DiGraph accept a dictionary of iterables as
> input. This is now #12653.
Cool! Thanks for the fix...
--
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@google
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:03:05AM +0100, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
> Or more generally, let DiGraph accept a dictionary of iterables as
> input. This is now #12653.
For the record: all tests passed on 5.0.beta6 with the following patches
applied:
trac_10817-generalized_associahedra-cs.patch
trac
Dear Vincent, dear Nathann,
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:33:48AM -0300, Vincent Delecroix wrote:
> There was in sage-combinat queue a patch of Mike that add to
> Permutation a decorator @combinatorial_class_from_iterator for
> burhat_succ and bruhat_pred in order to return a CombinatorialCla
Hi,
There was in sage-combinat queue a patch of Mike that add to
Permutation a decorator @combinatorial_class_from_iterator for
burhat_succ and bruhat_pred in order to return a CombinatorialClass
and not a list. In #12518, I replaced it with @set_from_method which
should be the new version of comb
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 06:46:33PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> Ok, here it is and the new method is indeed much better, so I will
> incorporate it
> into the patch:
Nice :-) Cool job!
> I can explain, but perhaps not on a public mailing list ... (plus
> the new method is better).
All I am sa
On 9/6/11 8:14 AM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 11:59:02PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
I now implemented another version of this method which is recursive
(the two methods are bruhat_upper_cover and bruhat_upper_cover_old).
I am not sure the complexity is any better though.
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 11:59:02PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> I now implemented another version of this method which is recursive
> (the two methods are bruhat_upper_cover and bruhat_upper_cover_old).
> I am not sure the complexity is any better though.
I like it, and am pretty sure it is much
On 9/5/11 1:13 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 11:04:53PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
I just added upper covers for Bruhat order to the patch
trac_11742-cores-add-as.patch.
If it looks ok, I will fold it into the cores patch.
Beware that one may get repeats as in:
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 11:04:53PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> I just added upper covers for Bruhat order to the patch
> trac_11742-cores-add-as.patch.
> If it looks ok, I will fold it into the cores patch.
Beware that one may get repeats as in:
sage: W = WeylGroup(["A",3,1])
sage: s
On 9/3/11 1:18 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery wrote:
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 11:48:13PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
I just noticed that we have
sage: W = WeylGroup(["A",3,1])
sage: w = W.an_element()
sage: w.bruhat_lower_covers
but not
sage: w.bruhat_upper_covers
Is there a reason for this? Both met
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 11:48:13PM -0700, Anne Schilling wrote:
> I just noticed that we have
>
> sage: W = WeylGroup(["A",3,1])
> sage: w = W.an_element()
> sage: w.bruhat_lower_covers
>
> but not
>
> sage: w.bruhat_upper_covers
>
> Is there a reason for this? Both methods do exist for weak or
Hi!
I just noticed that we have
sage: W = WeylGroup(["A",3,1])
sage: w = W.an_element()
sage: w.bruhat_lower_covers
but not
sage: w.bruhat_upper_covers
Is there a reason for this? Both methods do exist for weak order.
Using the revised poset code that some of you are working on, is it now po
Hi there,
> > I just created a poset using the new category. It seems to work except for
> >
> > sage: TestSuite(poset).run()
> > [...]
> > AssertionError: Not implemented method: antichains
> >
> > The followi
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 06:03:45PM +0200, Florent hivert wrote:
> I just created a poset using the new category. It seems to work except for
>
> sage: TestSuite(poset).run()
> [...]
> AssertionError: Not implemented method: antichains
> -
Hi Florent,
> I just created a poset using the new category. It seems to work except for
>
> sage: TestSuite(poset).run()
> [...]
> AssertionError: Not implemented method: antichains
>
> The following tests failed: _test_n
Hi there,
I just created a poset using the new category. It seems to work except for
sage: TestSuite(poset).run()
[...]
AssertionError: Not implemented method: antichains
The following tests failed: _test_not_i
Bonjour Frédéric!
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:12:57AM +0200, Frédéric Chapoton wrote:
> ... About posets in Sage ...
>
> j'ai vu que Christian Stump fait des choses sur les posets. Il me
> semble que Franco Saliola avait aussi fait des trucs. J'ai moi aussi
> fait un petit patch sur les pos
29 matches
Mail list logo
