givaro seems to be listing the powers of a multiplcative generator,
since that's how givaro represents finite field elements, so it would
be much harder (and slower) for it to do otherwise.

Personally I'm happy to allow Sage to decide which of the 4
implementations is used depending on the characteristic and degree;
and then to allow that implementation to do what is best for it.

Surely it is only for very small fields where we would be listing (or
iterating over) elements anyway?  So if you care that much, list all
the lements and then sort them how you like?

John

2009/9/3 Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu>:
>
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, YannLC wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I noticed that iterating over a finite field gives a different order
>> depending on the implementation:
>>
>> sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field_prime_modn.FiniteField_prime_modn
>> (7))
>> [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
>> sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field.FiniteField_givaro(7))
>> [0, 3, 2, 6, 4, 5, 1]
>> sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field_ext_pari.FiniteField_ext_pari
>> (2**3,'a'))
>> [0, 1, a, a + 1, a^2, a^2 + 1, a^2 + a, a^2 + a + 1]
>> sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field.FiniteField_givaro(2**3))
>> [0, a, a^2, a + 1, a^2 + a, a^2 + a + 1, a^2 + 1, 1]
>> sage: list(sage.rings.finite_field_ntl_gf2e.FiniteField_ntl_gf2e
>> (2**3,'a'))
>> [0, 1, a, a + 1, a^2, a^2 + 1, a^2 + a, a^2 + a + 1]
>>
>> I think we should change the behavior for FiniteField_givaro, but
>> maybe it's better to give the choice between the two behavior. Do you
>> think it's useful to keep both? Which one would you prefer for
>> default?
>
> By default, I'd prefer whatever is fastest to compute for a given
> representation.
>
> - Robert
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to 
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to