Conversation
These are prerequisites for having Combinatorica V2.0 to load without given errors. Combinatorica v2.0 (the version that is on par with the latest book) is starting to work, although testing shows it is not as good as v0.9 yet.
|
@mmatera I am guessing the All and Subsets should be unprotected by virtue of the error messages seen when trying to load Combinatorica V2.0. So please double check. @axelclk if you are listing and want to advice I would be appreciative. After this lands in master, I may put in another PR to add Combinatrica 2.0. Testing shows that right now, it isn't working as well as v0.9. And add that test will slow down testing even more. So I want to separate this part which is independent of a Combinatorica 2.0 review and possible merge. |
@rocky, can you provide a minimal example to see what is going on with these symbols? |
Given that The combinatorica-2.0 has the code for Combinatorica. Doing a Get on this gives in part: ... |
Since these should not be unprotected...
2d5d421 to
8f94d19
Compare
|
One other thought regarding the discrepency with Combinatorica v2.0 and WL specs: it is possible that at the time Combinatorica 2.0 was written everything was fine. I think in Wolfram's subsequent revisions of Combinatorica, it added namespaces to everything which would include both So it is possible that the better avenue would be to have this Mathics release compatibilty package which restores properties as they were when Combinatorica 2.0 was written. |
These are prerequisites for having Combinatorica V2.0 to load without
given errors.
Combinatorica v2.0 (the version that is on par with the latest book) is
starting to work, although testing shows it is not as good as v0.9 yet.