#15431: Transversal Design TD(6,12)
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
ncohen | Status: needs_review
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.2
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers:
combinatorics | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | a537755ebc4522efd30c12c9225abfcac1d36a90
Nathann Cohen | Stopgaps:
Report Upstream: N/A |
Branch: |
u/ncohen/15431 |
Dependencies: |
#15287 #15368 |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Changes (by ncohen):
* status: needs_info => needs_review
Comment:
Hello Vincent !
> 1) Let me reformulate a more general definition of TD that contains the
definition of an OA (but is equivalent up to relabeling):
Hey man, I am sorry but the definition of a TD is what it is. If Sage
implements a mathematical object, it has to be what people expect. I know
that the objects are equivalent, the theory knows that the objects are
equivalent, but they are two objects with different names and different
definitions.
Why on earth would it make any sense to implement different definitions
just because it makes the code easier ? That's crazy ! And WILL lead to
mistakes !
> The correspondence is just stupid and you already wrote it in your code:
What is this madness about ? Will you implement only one combinatorial
object just because all others are in bijection with it ? This is crazy.
> I am happy to do the change by myself if you agree.
No way. The definition of a TD in Sage will be the definition of a TD in
Books/Wikipedia/Papers.
> 2) In the definition of TD and OA (on both Wolfram and Wikipedia) there
is an extra parameter lambda. It is lost in your definition. Why?
Because it is equal to 1 in all the designs, which is what people would
expect. We can add it and raise an exception if anything different from 1
is given, or add in the documentation that it is assumed too be one
(which, again, is what people would expect). I don't like to add
parameters that cannot be changed, so I would prefer the second option.
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15431#comment:26>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
