On 2012-11-26, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is somewhat a continuation of the "permutations...again" thread, > but I think the topic is much broader than that. Over time > contributing Sage has become increasingly bureaucratic with the goal > (I hope) of getting higher-quality more-stable code. > > Raising the bar on Sage code quality creates this limbo area of code > that's good enough to be shared/built upon, but not good enough to be > included in Sage. The combinat folks seem to have realized this from > the beginning (hence the combinat queue) the biggest issue with it that they failed to sanitize very old Sage foundations they use: e.g. look at the badly abused Permutation_class, which is used for all sorts of sequences, many of which have absolutely nothing to do with permutations per se. By the way, currently it makes Sage basically unsuitable to use to teach permutations to undergraduates, as they are, quite understandably, immediately get lost, dazed and confused.
I actually think that Permutation_class issue deserves a coordinated effort to cleanup. Two patches Nathann just fixed #13742, and #13750, only touch the tip of the iseberg, it seems to me as their reviewer. Introduce a dedicated class Sequence or somesuch thing to cater for "permutations" which are actually not, something like this. (Could be that this already is happening, I don't know). Dima -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
