PlanePartitions silently ignores the symmetry keyword when the first argument is an integer:
sage: [PlanePartitions(n, symmetry="TSSCPP").cardinality() for n in range(15)]
[1, 1, 3, 6, 13, 24, 48, 86, 160, 282, 500, 859, 1479, 2485, 4167]
sage: oeis(_)
0: A000219: Number of planar partitions (or plane partitions) of n.
For TSSCPP this is particularly puzzling, since in this case, the box must be a cube, so we would have to do
sage: [PlanePartitions([n,n,n], symmetry="TSSCPP").cardinality() for n in range(0,15,2)]
[1, 1, 2, 7, 42, 429, 7436, 218348]
instead. As a side note, it would be more useful if PlanePartitions(3, symmetry="TSSCPP").cardinality() would return zero instead of raising an error.
Expected Behavior
I would expect
sage: [PlanePartitions(n, symmetry="TSSCPP").cardinality() for n in range(15)]
[1, 0, 1, 0, 2, 0, 7, 0, 42, 0, 429, 0, 7436, 0, 218348]
Actual Behavior
sage: [PlanePartitions(n, symmetry="TSSCPP").cardinality() for n in range(15)]
[1, 1, 3, 6, 13, 24, 48, 86, 160, 282, 500, 859, 1479, 2485, 4167]
Additional Information
No response
Environment
irrelevant
Checklist
[X] I have searched the existing issues for a bug report that matches the one I want to file, without success.
[X] I have read the documentation and troubleshoot guide
Steps To Reproduce
PlanePartitions
silently ignores thesymmetry
keyword when the first argument is an integer:For
TSSCPP
this is particularly puzzling, since in this case, the box must be a cube, so we would have to doinstead. As a side note, it would be more useful if
PlanePartitions(3, symmetry="TSSCPP").cardinality()
would return zero instead of raising an error.Expected Behavior
I would expect
Actual Behavior
Additional Information
No response
Environment
Checklist