#19930: A proper class for Hamming codes
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: dlucas | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-7.1
Component: coding theory | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: David Lucas | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/dlucas/hamming_code | cc49f28e7e3b2de8088d472588167034168820bb
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by dlucas):
I updated this ticket to latest beta.
I also added a note on `parity_check_matrix` method which points to some
references on how to build Hamming codes over anything else than a binary
field, as this is definitely non-standard.
Also note that with this ticket, the implementation of
`codes.LinearCodeFromCheckMatrix` can be improved so it does not rely on
the dual code but on the encoder introduced here (which saves computation
at construction time). See follow-up ticket #19975 for this issue.
----
New commits:
||[http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/commit/?id=cc237dbde588780f06a3078a2fa17e20e288b118
cc237db]||{{{Update to 7.1beta0}}}||
||[http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/commit/?id=cc49f28e7e3b2de8088d472588167034168820bb
cc49f28]||{{{Added references for computation of parity check matrix in
non-binary field}}}||
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/19930#comment:5>
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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
