#16295: Faster is_orthogonal_array
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: ncohen | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: combinatorial | Resolution:
designs | Merged in:
Keywords: | Reviewers:
Authors: Nathann Cohen | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: u/ncohen/16295 | 31e84b82913815b2005b5e2e45650c1568a45761
Dependencies: #16236 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by brett):
Nathann,
I strongly feel that it would be much more consistent with
1) what people in design theory will expect the code to do
2) the equivalence between OAs and MOLS
to have `are_mutually_orthogonal_squares` add the two extra columns and
then simply call `is_orthogonal_array`. This will have the effect of
checking that all the squares are, in fact latin and you will not have to
have `are_mutually_orthogonal_squares` do this extra checking.
in my opinion as a design theorist, the behaviour you cite in comment 62
of my code is all correct. In the second example the squares ARE
orthogonal, they are just NOT latin. if you add the additional two
columns the behaviour will be reported.
brett
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16295#comment:63>
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.
