#18617: Implement polynomial number_of_terms method (and deprecate
hamming_weight)
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: bruno | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.8
Component: commutative | Resolution:
algebra | Merged in:
Keywords: polynomial | Reviewers:
Authors: Bruno Grenet | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 60ee12ccb9e642959b02199d3cec81126fff64aa
u/bruno/hamming_weight_number_of_terms| Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jdemeyer):
Replying to [comment:7 bruno]:
> All your examples are for polynomials over `GF(2)`! (For 1., this is
specified in the docstring: {{{Only implemented for `p = 2`}}}.) I agree
that in this special case, the term "weight" may be quite common, but my
impression is that it is pretty rare for other base rings.
There is no fundamental reason to restrict to `GF(2)`. I think that
"weight" is simply ''used'' more rarely for other rings besides `GF(2)`.
This is for two reasons:
1. a "random" polynomial over `GF(2)` has a low weight (half the degree),
while a "random" polynomial over most rings has weight equal to the
degree. Thus, finding polynomials with small weight satisfying some
property is easiest over `GF(2)`.
2. in computer algebra it often makes sense to specialize algorithms for
`GF(2)`.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18617#comment:10>
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.
