#15310: Wilson's construction of Transversal Designs/Orthogonal Arrays/MOLS
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
ncohen | Status: positive_review
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.2
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers:
combinatorics | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | d74341411288315f13da3d4383e515b884ba7440
Nathann Cohen | Stopgaps:
Report Upstream: N/A |
Branch: |
u/ncohen/15310 |
Dependencies: |
#15287, #15431 |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
Yo !
> I do not think it is abstraction for abstraction’s sake to have an
single internal format. When this gets turned into a class of its own with
internal methods, etc. (later, not now) then it will need to have a single
internal data structure.
For the moment I did not see the need to turn it into a class. Especially
since making it a class will require many useless copies of stuff, each
time you ask the class to give you its data or when you build an instance
from the data (copy in each direction, for nothing).
> For example incidence structures (and by extension, designs) are stored
as their sets of sets.
And I like to work with list of sets indeed `:-P`
> The incidence matrix is equivalent but it is not a separate object with
its own construction methods distinct from incidence structures. In
addition to Vincint's comments, a single internal format allows
>
> - a single place to check all known non-existence results
>
> - future ease in making this a class
It is true, but if it means that implementing constructions becomes
harder, this is too much to pay. Really, give it a try. Today is a
holiday, and I have been implementing constructions since I woke up. It is
*HARD* and painful.
> Some kind of path used to construct an OA/TD is a great idea! This
could be really useful to the user. This is used by Charlie Colbourn on
his [http://www.public.asu.edu/~ccolbou/src/tabby/catable.htm]Covering
Array tables, but his cannot be parsed completely to the full list of
exact objects and constructions used. I thought a lot about this for CAs
in my thesis but I never came up with and format I liked. Are there these
kind of certificates for other objects anywhere in Sage that we could look
to for ideas?
I don't think so .... Designs are particularly messy in this respect `:-P`
Nathann
P.S. : Vincent is right, let's discuss this somewhere else. On the
otherhand, if you can review this ticket we can use it as a forum
afterwards `:-D`
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15310#comment:38>
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.
