The class RingFpImpl
is NOT intended for direct use by casual CoCoA
library users. Instead consult QuotientRing.txt, in particular the
functions NewZmod
and NewQuotientRing
.
In the directory examples/
there is a small example program showing
how small finite fields (with known implementation) can be created and
used: ex-RingFp2.C
.
To create a ring
of this type use one of the pseudo-constructors:
NewRingFp(Z, p) -- Z ring of integers, p a machine integer NewRingFp(Z, P) -- Z ring of integers, P a large integer (type ZZ) NewRingFp(Z, I) -- Z ring of integers, I an ideal of Z
The pseudo-constructors will fail if the characteristic is not prime
or is too large: the error signalled by throwing a CoCoA::ErrorInfo
whose code is CoCoA::ERR::BadSmallFpChar
.
If you seek a means for fast arithmetic in small finite fields consult
the documentation about SmallFpImpl
, SmallFpLogImpl
, and
SmallFpDoubleImpl
. All arithmetic on elements of a RingFpImpl
is actually carried out by a SmallFpImpl
object.
The class RingFpImpl
is intended to implement small, prime finite
fields. The constructor is more complicated than one might expect,
this is because the RingFpImpl
object must store a little extra
information to fulfil its role as a QuotientRingBase
. Currently,
the characteristic must be prime (otherwise it wouldn't be a field)
and must also be small enough that its square fits into a
SmallFpElem_t
(probably unsigned long
, see the file config.H);
if not, a CoCoAError
is signalled.
Extreme efficiency is NOT one of the main features of this version;
contrast this with SmallFpImpl
.
The class RingFpImpl
derives from QuotientRingBase
, which in
turn is derived from RingBase
: see QuotientRing
and ring
for more details. Note that there is no RingFp
class; a
RingFpImpl
object can only be accessed as a QuotientRing
.
Note the use of "argument checking" static member functions in the ctor:
this is because const
data members must be initialized before the main
body of the ctor is entered.
A member typedef RingFpImpl::value_t
specifies the type used for
representing the value of an element of a RingFpImpl
: this is a
typedef for SmallFpElem_t
which is defined in config.H (to facilitate
tuning for different platforms).
The data members are those of a QuotientRingBase
(which are used only
for answering queries about a QuotientRing
), plus the characteristic
of the field (held as an value_t
in myModulus
), and an auto-pointer
to a copy of the zero and one elements of the ring.
The zero and one elements of the ring is held in an auto_ptr<> for consistency with the implementation of other rings -- in this simple class it is not really necessary for exception safety.
This implementation is very simplistic: almost every operation is
delegated to the class SmallFpImpl
. The implementation class has been
separated so that its inline member functions can be used directly by
some other special case code (e.g. polynomials with SmallFp coeffs).
See SmallFpImpl.txt for details. I note that the residues are
represented as the least non-negative value in the residue class.
The largest permitted modulus for a RingFpImpl
may depend on the
platform. On a 32-bit machine the modulus must surely be less than
65536 -- refer to SmallFpImpl.txt for details. A 64-bit machine may
allow larger characteristics.
Although it may seem wasteful to use heap memory for the values of
elements in a RingFpLogImpl
, trying to make them "inline" leads to
lots of problems. Originally we had implemented the values as "inline",
and the resulting problems delayed CoCoALib by almost a year.
Why does the class RingFp
not exist? Well, my current thoughts
are that since a RingFp
would not do anything special which a
QuotientRing
cannot do, it seems needless extra complication to
create a "useless" class. In particular, it cannot offer better
run-time performance. If you want to compute quickly modulo a small
prime you must use SmallFpImpl
directly.
Probably RingFp
, RingFpLog
and RingFpDouble
could be replaced by
instances of a template class -- the template parameter would be
SmallFpImpl
, SmallFpLogImpl
or SmallFpDoubleImpl
accordingly.
Why do all the member functions blindly forward their calls to the
SmallFpImpl
member functions? This means that the error message
for division by zero (say) will refer to SmallFpImpl
rather than
RingFpImpl
. Does this really matter that much? Obviously the
much same applies to RingFpLogImpl
and RingFpDoubleImpl
.