Ticket #12897 (closed enhancement: fixed)

Opened 13 months ago

Last modified 12 months ago

Increase doctest coverage in coding/sd_codes.py to 100%

Reported by: benjaminfjones Owned by: mvngu
Priority: minor Milestone: sage-5.1
Component: documentation Keywords: linear code doctest coverage
Cc: Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A Reviewers: Punarbasu Purkayastha
Authors: Benjamin Jones Merged in: sage-5.1.beta1
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Description (last modified by benjaminfjones) (diff)

As the summary says. As of sage-5.0.beta12 we have: 

sd_codes.py
SCORE sd_codes.py: 20% (1 of 5)

Missing documentation:
	 * MS(n):
	 * matA(n):
	 * matId(n):
	 * MS2(n):

Apply trac_12897_sd_codes_coverage.v2.patch Download to Sage library.

Attachments

trac_12897_sd_codes_coverage.v2.patch Download (34.8 KB) - added by benjaminfjones 13 months ago.

Change History

comment:1 Changed 13 months ago by benjaminfjones

  • Status changed from new to needs_review

After the patch: 

> sage -coverage sd_codes.py
----------------------------------------------------------------------
sd_codes.py
SCORE sd_codes.py: 100% (5 of 5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

> sage -t --optional sd_codes.pysage -t --optional "devel/sage-test/sage/coding/sd_codes.py"
	 [3.0 s]
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All tests passed!
Total time for all tests: 3.0 seconds

comment:2 Changed 13 months ago by benjaminfjones

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:3 Changed 13 months ago by ppurka

I have just one comment:

In matA(n) and matId(n) it should be mentioned that the field is GF(2). Also, \delta_ij in matA should be \delta_{ij}.

Other than that, the patch looks good to me.

comment:4 Changed 13 months ago by benjaminfjones

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:5 follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 13 months ago by benjaminfjones

Ok, good point. The new patch has the changes.

comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 5 Changed 13 months ago by ppurka

Replying to benjaminfjones:

Ok, good point. The new patch has the changes.

I think you uploaded the older patch by mistake. :)

Changed 13 months ago by benjaminfjones

comment:7 Changed 13 months ago by benjaminfjones

Yes, sorry about that. It is the correct version now.

comment:8 Changed 13 months ago by ppurka

  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
  • Reviewers set to Punarbasu Purkayastha

Thanks.

Looks good and passes all doctests in sage/coding (it shouldn't be affecting anything else anyway) in 5.0-beta12. Positive review from my side.

comment:9 Changed 12 months ago by jdemeyer

  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Merged in set to sage-5.1.beta1
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.