Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
#9267 closed defect (fixed)
Update the charge statistic on words
Reported by: | Jason Bandlow | Owned by: | Sage Combinat CC user |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-4.5.2 |
Component: | combinatorics | Keywords: | words, charge, cocharge |
Cc: | Merged in: | sage-4.5.2.alpha0 | |
Authors: | Jason Bandlow | Reviewers: | Franco Saliola |
Report Upstream: | N/A | Work issues: | |
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
The following behavior is currently in sage:
sage: w = Word([1,2,3,1,2]) sage: w.charge() 0
This is inconsistent with the definition one usually finds in the literature, which would give the charge of this word as 2. (see Macdonald's book, for example).
The goal of this ticket is to fix this bug, add a cocharge statistic, and extend the definition to words without partition content.
See this thread on sage-combinat-devel for discussion of this ticket.
Attachments (1)
Change History (8)
comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by
Authors: | → Jason Bandlow |
---|---|
Description: | modified (diff) |
Status: | new → needs_review |
comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by
Status: | needs_review → needs_work |
---|
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by
Reviewers: | → Franco Saliola |
---|---|
Status: | needs_work → needs_review |
Wow, I can't believe I forgot to put those comments in after all the discussion. Thanks a lot for the review, Franco. Please look at the new version and let me know what you think.
comment:4 follow-up: 5 Changed 12 years ago by
Status: | needs_review → needs_info |
---|
Jason, is the \A intentional in references [2] and [3]?
Otherwise, this gets a positive review from me, provided that the documentation builds correctly (I have not had the chance to build it yet, and won't be able to do it today).
Changed 12 years ago by
Attachment: | trac_9267-charge_jb.patch added |
---|
comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by
Status: | needs_info → needs_review |
---|
Replying to saliola:
Jason, is the \A intentional in references [2] and [3]?
In a first, incorrectly sphinxed, attempt to add these references, the 'A.' was being interpreted as the start of a list, so I had to make the 'A' a literal. But that's not happening anymore, so I've removed the backslash.
Otherwise, this gets a positive review from me, provided that the documentation builds correctly (I have not had the chance to build it yet, and won't be able to do it today).
Great! I think the doc builds ok, but I will wait until someone else verifies this instead of setting positive review on my own patch.
Thanks again, Franco.
comment:7 Changed 12 years ago by
Merged in: | → sage-4.5.2.alpha0 |
---|---|
Resolution: | → fixed |
Status: | positive_review → closed |
Tested against sage-4.4.4. Patch applies cleanly. All tests pass. The code looks good.
Just a few documentation issues:
s_i
operators, etc.