On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Nicolas M. Thiery <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:45:03PM +0200, Florent hivert wrote: >> Hi There, >> >> Speaking about hash... >> >> > - Much worst: the Python assumption that the hash value of an object >> > does not change can easily be broken inadvertently, even by a total >> > beginner, by using the rename feature: >> > >> > sage: K = QQ['x'] >> > sage: hash(K) >> > -764788796815899192 >> > sage: K.rename("K") >> > sage: hash(K) >> > 9600028874 >> >> This one is fixed in #8119 thanks to Robert Bradshaw. I'm ok with the patch >> but I added a review patch so I can't put positive review myself. Also, #9181 >> is a very simple patch (only doc) about hash and awaiting for review for >> long. > > I just set a positive review on #9181, and added a comment on #8119.
I created http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11231 for the sparse/dense polynomial ring issue, and fixed the typo in #8119. - Robert -- To post to this group, send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
