#19226: some (collinearity graphs of) GQ(q-1,q+1)
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
dimpase | Status: needs_work
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.9
enhancement | Resolution:
Priority: major | Merged in:
Component: graph | Reviewers: Nathann Cohen
theory | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | 2a62ef16861fb421358f3d5f636cc9fc97e59011
Report Upstream: N/A | Stopgaps:
Branch: |
u/dimpase/GQ |
Dependencies: |
#19136 |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment (by dimpase):
Replying to [comment:10 ncohen]:
> Dima,
>
> - Documentation of `AhrensSzekeresGQ` -- the first line seems to miss
> backticks. Also, please write complete sentence in english and not 'of
GQ
> AS(q)'.
>
> - Same function: you "define" q in the second line of the paragraph
while you
> use it in the first.
>
> - Could you rewrite the lines in "set notation", i.e. {{{* `(\sigma, a,
b),
> \sigma\in F_q`}}} -> {{{* `\{(\sigma, a, b): \sigma\in F_q\}`}}}?. It
would be
> easier to understand.
>
> - Documentation of `T2starGQ` -- also needs some backticks.
>
> - Same function: `q` should also be defined at the beginning of the
paragraph.
right, all the above is fixed in the last commit.
>
> - All graph constructors end in 'Graph'. Except the the ones you added
recently,
> I missed that `:-/`lah
well, isn't it high time to realise that `graphs.BlahBLahGraph` is an
abomination, for stuff in `graphs.*` is meant to be a graph after all...
>
> - Please do not use GQ anywhere which is not a mathematical notation,
> e.g. neither in paragraphs of documentation nor in the constructor's
name. As
> far as I know it is a global Sage convention to write everything
expanded as
> much as possible.
>
> - What is the point of the `hyperoval` argument that lets the user
specify one?
> It makes the code more complicated, and you do not seem to use it
yourself. If
> you remove it, I guess that `check_hyperoval` can be removed too.g
well, `T_2^*(q)` is in fact `T_2^*(O)`, so I'm following the standard
definition.
And there is a sizable cottage industry of hyperoval production out there,
so it's good to have things ready for them.
>
> - In `is_GQqmqp`: instead of having a 'if' inside of the 'if', could you
compute
> q *before* the first if (using `//` instead of `/`) so that you can
call
> `is_prime` directly?
Why? I think it's clean the way it is written. In 99% of the cases we
don't even reach the 2nd if.
>
> - Same function: you don't need to filter which function you should
> import. Import both, there is no time to save there, only added code
> complexity.
I do not just import, I set up a function `F` to be called.
This is why I do it this way...
>
> - in `ProjectiveGeometryDesign`: could you change the default of
> `point_coordinates`?
would it make things less efficient?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19226#comment:14>
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.
