Maybe you should find somebody who works on linear codes to review, or ask on sage-devel.
As for code style, it looks generally good. Better class names would help (class _InnerGroup, class _Labra). Do we really need a LinearCode_AutGroupCanLabel in the global namespace? Not only is the name terribly (mixed camel case underscores), it also seems that you can only pass it a LinearCode as argument. This ought to be implemented by a constructor method on LinearCode then. Your class could be a subclass of LinearCode that is constructed by LinearCode() if the linear code is suitable. Or, if it is always applicable, your functionality should just be part of LinearCode. Also, I don't see any permutation group action perm * code implemented, this seems like it is a pretty simple usability enhancement. On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 7:46:45 AM UTC+1, Thomas Feulner wrote: > > The last post to this thread is 2 years old, but I have continued my work > on canonical forms for linear codes. > > I have followed up Dima`s proposal and prepared a package, which is > entirely written in Python/Cython, since there is no one willing to review > my tickets on the same topic. > > This new package, which could be found > here<http://www.algorithm.uni-bayreuth.de/en/team/Feulner_Thomas/codecan-1_0_spkg.zip>, > > provides a canonical form algorithm for linear codes over finite fields and > *finite chain rings*. It is also able to compute the automorphism group > of these codes as a by-product. > > I would be pleased to hear some comments. > > Thomas > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
