#20201: Improving Efficiency of LinearCode.NearestNeighborDecoder method
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: arpitdm | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-7.2
Component: coding theory | Resolution:
Keywords: beginner | Merged in:
Authors: Arpit Merchant | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/arpitdm/improving_efficiency_of_linearcode_nearestneighbordecoder_method|
170b3fc8ff8e9f7333a06e0c84f552857e911732
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jsrn):
> You made a mistake when declaring the iterator: `It =
iter(self.code.list())` won't work (and does not) as `code` is a method
over `self`. So it should be: `It = iter(self.code().list())`.
Actually, that's bad too: `self.code().list()` is going to instantiate an
explicit list of all codewords in memory, so you're back to using
exponential memory. You *could* write `It = iter(self.code())`: that would
make an explicit iterator without requiring exponential memory. However,
that's C++ style coding. It is much more pythonic to write something like:
{{{
for c in self.code():
#blah
}}}
It is nothing but syntactic sugar for instantiating the iterator, but it
is much more readable and less prone to programming errors.
I have ever only created explicit iterators in very rare cases in Python.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/20201#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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
