On Saturday, October 5, 2013 8:42:34 AM UTC+1, Thomas Feulner wrote: > @Volker: You are right, the names are terrible. I will change them. There > is no need to have LinearCode_AutGroupCanLabel in the global namespace. I > think LinearCode should have a member of this type, but I was not sure if > this goes well together with an experimental/optional package. Afterwards, > I could adapt the automorphism group method and add a method > canonical_form() to LinearCode. >
We try to avoid *removing* globals in the Sage library since it can break other people's code. Making it accessible from LinearCode.canonical_form() souds good to me. Even though I don't work on coding theory, it seems like the functionality should be in Sage by default. I think it would be best if you finish your ticket as a normal patch for the Sage library and then we'll have it reviewed. Nobody reads all trac tickets, so if you are looking for reviewers for larger chunks of code its good to post to sage-devel and/or ask people with similar interest directly. -- 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.
