We have completed our initial implementation of covering arrays with basic methods. It is ready for review and we are looking for reviewers. The pull request is here:
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/35008 brett On Monday, June 6, 2022 at 1:44:33 PM UTC-4 brett stevens wrote: > Thanks David. I wanted to additionally flag our second question: > > > - Would it additionally be useful to re-implement orthogonal arrays as a > child class of a covering arrays class and move the orthogonal array > methods into that class? What would be the least disruptive way to do this? > > because we know that this would involve modifying code that other people > have written and invested time and effort into. I think there are > advantages to having OAs be a class but I would be happier with the change > in approach being approved by some of the original implementers of the OA > source code. > > thanks > brett > On Tuesday, May 31, 2022 at 3:56:08 PM UTC-4 David Joyner wrote: > >> On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 2:35 PM brett stevens <bret...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Myself and my M.Sc. student Aaron Dwyer are interested in adding >> covering arrays to sagemath in the design theory code. We have been >> reviewing the orthogonal array code as guidance and have some questions for >> sage-combinat-devel community. >> > >> > - We note that orthogonal arrays are not implemented as a class. Our >> initial thoughts were to implement covering arrays as a class. What do you >> all think about that? >> > >> >> This sounds okay to me, however, I'm ccing sage-devel in case some >> experts aren't subscribed to this list. >> >> > - Would it additionally be useful to re-implement orthogonal arrays as >> a child class of a covering arrays class and move the orthogonal array >> methods into that class? What would be the least disruptive way to do this? >> > >> > - We know that in sagemath development it is often a good idea to make >> small patches that are easy to review and edit. Would the right initial >> things to implement be the necessary class structure, documentation, >> self-checker (analogous to ```is_t_design``` in ```block_design```), >> formatted print and output to equivalent objects like a group divisible >> covering design? >> > >> > - One of our more substantive goals is to implement the perfect hash >> family and covering perfect hash family constructions. We are happy to hear >> what other people think would be important methods to implement for in a >> covering array class. >> > >> > brett stevens >> > Aaron Dwyer >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> an email to sage-combinat-d...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-combinat-devel/8926605c-d908-4d97-bdd7-2bd9bb552040n%40googlegroups.com >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-combinat-devel/4d18c48c-b87f-40cd-af10-8094570519a7n%40googlegroups.com.
