Opened 5 years ago

Closed 5 years ago

#22867 closed defect (fixed)

LatticePoset: Reverse completion_by_cuts()

Reported by: jmantysalo Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone: sage-8.0
Component: combinatorics Keywords:
Cc: tscrim Merged in:
Authors: Jori Mäntysalo Reviewers: Travis Scrimshaw
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: 8a206d8 (Commits, GitHub, GitLab) Commit: 8a206d857e9f478ec5b800c1c7516033c3645f72
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description (last modified by jmantysalo)

Dedekind-MacNeille? completion can be defined as the smallest lattice containing given partial order. However, in Sage completion_by_cuts() gives the dual; try

Y = Poset({1: [2], 2: [3, 4]})
Y.completion_by_cuts()

Hence I suggest that we reverse the output of this function.

Change History (8)

comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by jmantysalo

  • Branch set to u/jmantysalo/latticeposet__reverse_completion_by_cuts__

comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by jmantysalo

  • Authors set to Jori Mäntysalo
  • Cc tscrim added
  • Commit set to ed1b36b87eacee00daa469eaea0e962e5048a2cf
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

A oneliner for review.


New commits:

ed1b36bReverse completion_by_cuts().

comment:3 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from ed1b36b87eacee00daa469eaea0e962e5048a2cf to 1f043f0c7fcd3c0061f0e39d0a3dc71316dd0211

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

1f043f0Merge branch 'develop' into t/22867/latticeposet__reverse_completion_by_cuts__

comment:4 follow-up: Changed 5 years ago by tscrim

I think we should add a doctest. Otherwise LGTM.

comment:5 Changed 5 years ago by git

  • Commit changed from 1f043f0c7fcd3c0061f0e39d0a3dc71316dd0211 to 8a206d857e9f478ec5b800c1c7516033c3645f72

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

8a206d8Add an example/test.

comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 4 Changed 5 years ago by jmantysalo

Replying to tscrim:

I think we should add a doctest. Otherwise LGTM.

Added, but now compiling on a slow machine and so not tested.

I also added a non-related correction to a docstring in lattices.py.

comment:7 Changed 5 years ago by tscrim

  • Reviewers set to Travis Scrimshaw
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

Thanks.

comment:8 Changed 5 years ago by vbraun

  • Branch changed from u/jmantysalo/latticeposet__reverse_completion_by_cuts__ to 8a206d857e9f478ec5b800c1c7516033c3645f72
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.