#16644: LinearCode.cardinality category breakage
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: ppurka | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: coding theory | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Travis Scrimshaw, | Reviewers: Punarbasu
Punarbasu Purkayastha | Purkayastha, Travis Scrimshaw
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
public/categories/new_parent_linear_codes-16644|
60130279bc91553f0bb8418cebd0597506eb0978
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ppurka):
@tscrim: I think what vbraun brought up needs to be fixed in the category
framework somewhere.
Other than that, we can not depend on `cardinality` of the
`FiniteEnumeratedSets`, even if it comes "for free". It comes at a huge
cost because it generates all the elements of the linear code - it makes
working with large linear codes difficult. We have a vector space
structure here, so we can be much more efficient (which was my original
patch in this ticket).
{{{
sage: C = codes.ReedSolomonCode(10, 7, GF(11))
sage: %time C.cardinality()
CPU times: user 8.14 s, sys: 60 ms, total: 8.2 s
Wall time: 8.1 s
19487171
sage: %time len(C)
CPU times: user 0 ns, sys: 0 ns, total: 0 ns
Wall time: 62.9 µs
19487171
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16644#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.
