Opened 7 years ago
Last modified 7 years ago
#16748 new defect
FinitePoset argument parsing is not robust enough
Reported by: | tscrim | Owned by: | tscrim |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-6.4 |
Component: | combinatorics | Keywords: | |
Cc: | stumpc5, VivanePons | Merged in: | |
Authors: | Reviewers: | ||
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description
Currently we have
sage: P = Poset([[],[[0,1]]]) sage: Q = Poset([[],[[0,2]]]) sage: R = Q.canonical_label() sage: P.hasse_diagram() == R.hasse_diagram() True sage: list(P) == list(R) True sage: P.cover_relations() == R.cover_relations() True sage: P is R False sage: P == R False
The issue is that FinitePoset
doesn't parse the arguments to a standard form as much as it should.
Change History (2)
comment:1 Changed 7 years ago by
comment:2 Changed 7 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-6.3 to sage-6.4
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
Possibly related to #14019, which "will be fixed in one month" 18 months ago. Also, who in their right minds designs a UniqueRepresentation class with an inplace relabel method ? (i.e. not immutable)
Nathann