robert bristow-johnson <[email protected]> wrote:

>yeah, you're right. the code is correct. i almost went and changed
>it at Wikipedia, but thought better.

It's a pretty weak Wikipedia page. It does not mention, for
example, that one is calculating a remainder. I do not
know anyone who uses the terminology Fibonacci LFSR,
and the polynomial in the "Fibonacci" section is reversed
from any normal usage. There is no mathematical difference
between the sequences described in the "Fibonacci" and
"Galois" sections of this article. The article refers
to the "conventional LFSR" as though it is something different
than the "Galois" one, which it calls "alternate".

Maybe I will input a complaint on the talk page.

Steve