#18269: A new structure for experimentation on decoding: communication channels
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
dlucas | Status: needs_work
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.7
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers:
coding theory | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | 5f31c5cef52b9b0bdbd905f4ff132e344446e766
Report Upstream: N/A | Stopgaps:
Branch: |
u/dlucas/channels |
Dependencies: |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment (by vdelecroix):
Replying to [comment:12 vdelecroix]:
> > Moreover it shows that `sample_range` would better be an iterator
instead of returning a list. By the way, this function `sample_range` has
currently linear complexity in `n`, isn't it possible to make it linear in
`k`?
>
> Yes it is (the solution is not exactly linear though)
> ...
> It is roughly the same speed for `n=100` but for `n=1000` yours is twice
slower.
This code for subsets is just using
{{{
sage: sample(range(n), k)
}}}
So I guess this is currently the best way to do it. And moreover, looking
at Python doc
{{{
To choose a sample in a range of integers, use xrange as an argument.
This is especially fast and space efficient for sampling from a
large population: sample(xrange(10000000), 60)
}}}
Sorry for my previous remarks. You should just get rid of
`sample_range(n,k)` and use `sample(xrange(n),k)`.
Vincent
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18269#comment:13>
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.
