-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 553
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Trivial bug in computing faces of non-full-dimensional lattice polytopes #8934
Comments
Author: Andrey Novoseltsev |
comment:2
I'm pretty sure you need the double colon in
or the example will not be typeset correctly. A special case of non-full-dimensional polytopes is the zero-dimensional case. This one is also broken, but in a slightly different way:
Also, |
comment:3
I added ":" into the docstring and tried to address some of the issues with 0-dimensional polytopes, namely, it is now possible to ask for points and faces of them. The list of faces in this case is empty, since only proper faces are returned in the other dimensions. In particular, asking for any faces of the given dimension will cause an error, but that seems to be consistent and I have documented it. I also added a synonym "all_facet_equations" for "all_polars", since calling the second one does not make a lot of sense for non-reflexive polytopes (although it will do the job). Thanks a lot for quick reviews! |
comment:4
The new patch looks good! I've tried it and it works as expected. Should be committed to Sage asap. |
Merged: sage-4.4.4.alpha0 |
Reviewer: Voker Braun |
Changed reviewer from Voker Braun to Volker Braun |
Currently computing faces of a non-full-dimensional lattice polytopes causes and exception, because when I was implementing support for such polytopes I missed a parameter in one place. The attached little patch fixes it and adds a doctest for the future.
CC: @vbraun
Component: geometry
Author: Andrey Novoseltsev
Reviewer: Volker Braun
Merged: sage-4.4.4.alpha0
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/8934
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: