#16272: redesign transversal designs
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vdelecroix | Owner: Vincent Delecroix
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.2
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: designs, | Merged in:
orthogona arrays | Reviewers:
Authors: Vincent Delecroix | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: public/16272 | bcf917589a03c3e71a800a51d181ed24a96834f9
Dependencies: #15310, #16227 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by vdelecroix):
Hi Nathann,
You are right. I moved `TD_existence` as a doctest in `transversal_design`
and now `projective_plane_as_OA` belongs to the module `block_design`.
The function `projective_plane_as_OA` is not similar to
`ProjectivePlaneDesign` as it returns an OA (moreover, possibly not a
complete OA(n+1,n,2)). To write it, I just pick the code from what was in
OA and put it in an independent function. To my mind, we should keep the
`ProjectivePlaneDesign` function as it was before.
Is it better like that?
Vincent
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16272#comment:22>
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.
