Hello John, Thanks for your comment.
2014-06-10 10:45 UTC+02:00, John Cremona <[email protected]>: > On 10 June 2014 09:34, Vincent Delecroix <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I need to generate simply multiplicative cosets of finite fields. I >> created the ticket #16464 for that and the method is called >> "multiplicative_cosets". Please tell me if the name is not >> appropriate. > > I did not immediately realise what your meant by the term. I see that > the input is not a subgroup (as suggested, to me at least, by the word > "coset") but actually a factor e of q-1, and the cosets you return are > orbits under mulkplication by x^e where x is a multiplcative generator > (the result being independent of the choice of generator). Nope, it is not. The set of cosets is independent but there is a keyword "cosets" that allows to get only some of the cosets. And these are not independent of the generator. You convinced me that it is more natural to send x^e as the first argument instead of e (see also below). > How about "multiplcative_orbits"? But someone who uses this > constructions should have a say. Actually, I was first thinking about "cyclotomic_cosets" that is already used as a global function sage: cyclotomic_cosets(3,13) [[0], [1, 3, 9], [2, 5, 6], [4, 10, 12], [7, 8, 11]] which is right now similar (except the [0]) to sage: GF(13).multiplicative_cosets(4) # 4 seen as x^4 [[1, 3, 9], [2, 6, 5], [4, 12, 10], [8, 11, 7]] Vincent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-nt" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-nt. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
