Closed mantepse closed 7 years ago
Branch: u/mantepse/growth_diagrams
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
0edd4e4 | new methods to_word and to_biword for rectangular fillings |
Author: Martin Rubey
Comments very welcome!
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
a98c9e7 | add domino forward |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
d006e7e | catch error in to_biword |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
5e0c373 | make everything a little better |
Where should I put the documentation? catalog_partitions.py
?
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
61a126d | beautify documentation |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
c0ef388 | fix docbuild problems |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
dda776e | make rules methods, mainly to beautify documentation |
Looks like this will become a very good addition to Sage. I think your choice of catalog_partitions.py
is the best place in the doc. Some quick comments:
In Sage, we have the triple quotes on their own line, so you should revert this change:
class SkewTableau(ClonableList):
- """
- A skew tableau.
+ """A skew tableau.
as well as convert the others.
from_chain
, it should be EXAMPLES::
._shape_from_labels
could be an @abstract_method
and needs a doctest irregardless. (I typically do an example for a subclass which demonstrates the expected behavior.)out_labels
and in_labels
need doctests.__init__
, you don't need to define an __init__
(e.g., GrowthDiagramRSK
).Replying to @tscrim:
Looks like this will become a very good addition to Sage. I think your choice of
catalog_partitions.py
is the best place in the doc. Some quick comments:
Thanks!
- When you just pass the same args to the base class
__init__
, you don't need to define an__init__
(e.g.,GrowthDiagramRSK
).
Could you expand on this? (Eg., by example)
Oh, thanks! I somehow didn't see that I really don't do anything but passing the arguments...
Related question: should I replace the (soft) requirement to implement _shape_from_labels
with the (soft) requirement to implement the rank function of the dual graded graphs? ("soft" means that not implementing this doesn't render the whole thing useless, just less practical: without it, one has to provide the shape of the region always.)
The downside is: it might be that the covering relation is easier than the rank function... Moreover, if we want to check the argument labels
, we need the two covering relations, not just the rank.
On the other hand, it would be much less code.
I can't really answer that without doing a more detailed review, which I don't have the time right now for (maybe in a week or so).
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
a60a9f2 | add introduction, fix triple quotes |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
0690c86 | move P and Q symbol to where it belongs |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
5a06189 | move shape_from_labels to main class |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
9f8725b | improve doctests, make rules static, include Young-Fibonacci |
Dependencies: #21609
I need help with the following complaint of the patchbot:
========== next_method ==========
git checkout patchbot/ticket_merged
Already on 'patchbot/ticket_merged'
inside file: b/src/sage/combinat/growth.py
@@ -0,0 +1,1374 @@
+ v = filling.itervalues().next()
python2-only .next() method inserted on 1 non-empty lines
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage_patchbot/patchbot.py", line 1060, in test_a_ticket
baseline=baseline, **kwds)
File "/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage_patchbot/plugins.py", line 358, in next_method
msg="python2-only .next() method", **kwds)
File "/home/patchbot/sage-patchbot/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sage_patchbot/plugins.py", line 214, in exclude_new
raise ValueError(full_msg)
ValueError: python2-only .next() method inserted on 1 non-empty lines
next_method -- 0 seconds
========== end next_method ==========
What should I do about it?
Change iter.next()
to (the Python3 compatible) next(iter)
.
Edit - more explicitly: filling.itervalues().next()
-> next(filling.itervalues())
you can and should get rid of the deprecation
+ sage: pi.descents()
+ doctest:...: DeprecationWarning: default behavior of descents may change in the near future to have indices starting from 1
+ See http://trac.sagemath.org/20555 for details.
+ [0, 2, 4, 5]
by setting explicitly from_zero=True
(or False if you prefer):
sage: pi.descents(from_zero=True)
this is still to be corrected:
+ """A skew tableau.
by adding a line break between """
and A
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
6f39955 | fix triple quote |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
e8f4445 | fix descent deprecation |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
ede2937 | fix python2/3 iter.next() |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
b000413 | factor out half perimeter |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
1f2f566 | add sylvester insertion on binary trees, and document a possible bug in young fibonacci |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
c0ffb06 | make checking of labels possible, example in YoungFibonacci |
Depends on #21609
CC: @sagetrac-sage-combinat @darijgr @tscrim @kevindilks @sagetrac-etzanaki @VivianePons
Component: combinatorics
Keywords: days82
Author: Martin Rubey
Branch:
0b566fa
Reviewer: Frédéric Chapoton, Travis Scrimshaw
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21594