New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Better Sage consistency for naming and calling in linear_code #17973
Comments
Commit: |
Author: David Lucas |
comment:4
Hello ! I would say that this is good to go, except for one detail: could you deprecate the methods using http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/coding_in_python.html#deprecation Nathann |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:6
It's done! I also replaced "check matrix" by "parity check matrix" in |
comment:8
There are two broken doctests in binary_code.pyx:
|
Reviewer: Nathann Cohen |
comment:9
And many others in Nathann |
comment:11
Thanks for the advice. I was indeed able to find some more after a |
comment:13
OKayyyyyyyyyyy then it's good to go ! Nathann |
Changed branch from u/dlucas/better_sage_consistency_for_naming_and_calling_in_linear_code to |
Some method and parameter names in linear_code.py file are abbreviated names which might be confusing (for instance the
distance
parameter actually stands for the minimum distance).Most importantly, the
gen_mat
method will be renamedgenerator_matrix
and thecheck_mat
methodparity_check_matrix
.Besides, some getter methods to access the private fields of linear codes exist but are not used internally in the class.
To support subclassing, it is better to use these instead of directly invoking a parameter.
CC: @johanrosenkilde @defeo @nathanncohen
Component: coding theory
Author: David Lucas
Branch/Commit:
cd3c6ee
Reviewer: Nathann Cohen
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/17973
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: