[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jason Grout wrote: > >> >> Robert's patch on trac #1900 affords an opportunity to bring up a small >> simplification of adjacency_matrix(). It seems that the over_integers >> parameter over-complicates the interface. There are other more standard >> ways of specifying the ring over which you would like a matrix, like: >> >> sage: # G is the graph >> sage: matrix(GF(2),G) >> >> or >> >> sage: G.am().change_ring(GF(2)) >> >> Can we get rid of the over_integers parameter in favor of these two ways >> of requesting a matrix over a specific ring? No functionality is lost >> (since the GF(2) matrix was only returned if there were no multiple >> edges). Simplicity seems to be gained, since, at least as far as I'm >> aware, adjacency matrices are usually thought to be over the integers, >> not over GF(2), even though we understand they are zero-one matrices. >> >> Of course, if I'm mistaken, let me know. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jason > > An emphatic +1.
Great! Can you or Robert (or someone else) review the patch at #1900? Thanks, Jason --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
