The name index follows Python convention >>> [1, 2, 5, -2, 3].index(-2) 3
sounds like a much better name than rank. Note that rank could also refer to the dimension of a vector space/free module or the number of generators of a free group. On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 at 22:32, Nils Bruin <nbr...@sfu.ca> wrote: > > Agreed! In fact, looking at the docstring, it seems like "rank" is just an > alias for "index". Of course, "index" is going to be a similarly overloaded > term, but at least "rank" can be freed up by just dropping it as an alias of > "index". You can then solve the problems of "index" separately. > > For "unrank" (which according to the doc should give the position of an > element in the enumeration) you could use "ordinal" instead, but "unrank" is > such an ugly word that I don't think you'll run into many clashes for that > one. > > On Tuesday, 19 August 2025 at 07:33:03 UTC-7 axio...@yahoo.de wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> in the category for `EnumeratedSets` we have methods `rank` and `unrank` >> that provide a bijection between the set and the natural numbers (or some >> interval [0,n], if the cardinality is n). These methods are mostly used in >> the category framework, I think, to provide generic implementations of >> `random_element` and the like. >> >> Unfortunately, this conflicts with the method `rank` in Posets and >> WeylGroups, as I realized while adding a test_rank method (which in turn >> uncovered quite a few bugs). >> >> Even though `rank` and `unrank` were introduced very early in the game, I >> think it would make sense to rename them to something less confusing and >> deprecate them. I don't think they are used much by users. For example, I >> think `total_order_rank` and `total_order_unrank` would be OK. >> >> I don't think it is wise to rename `Poset.rank` or `WeylGroup.rank`, because >> these are really extremely standard. We do have >> `StandardTableau.standard_descents` and >> `StandardTableau.standard_major_index`, because of an historical accident, >> and I think it's a pain. However, if very many people think it is better to >> do `Poset.standard_rank`, than this would also be an option. >> >> I am also open to other suggestions, but I really think that these methods >> should be tested systematically. >> >> Martin > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/c97ab592-3a65-4fa9-8dc4-34b8176585b9n%40googlegroups.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAGEwAA%3DWW_ZR6gt8auQ0sFftBLjmGGsPMLM2wdq2Sws30j%3DHuA%40mail.gmail.com.
