On Sep 15, 3:44 am, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Håkan Granath
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sep 14, 12:16 am, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Alastair correctly deduced the issue that it can't tell if the number
> >> is less than or greater than 2, what should it do here?
>
> > I do not know what it should do, but what I would have expected
> > in this case is that continued_fraction would first compute the
> > 53 bit approximation of the input, and then return the continued
> > fraction of that approximation.
>
> If this is what you want, the way to get that is to give it something
> that has 53 bits of precision.

I completely agree :-) In fact, that is what I tried to do but
got unexpected results. Some background information:

I compute some quantity a, which is a product of the result of
some high precision (say 1000 bits) numerical computation and an
exact algebraic factor. The number a is expected to be rational,
so to identify it I do something like

  b = a.n(1000)
  v = continued_fraction(b)

However this did not always work, because in some cases b was not
a floating point number as expected but a symbolic expression (a
bug in my opinion, see below). This, I found, can make the
continued fraction computation fail in 2 ways:

  1. Sometimes, since b is symbolic it is computed with the
  default 53 bit precision which is inadequate for my purposes.

  2. Sometimes v would be the empty list.

Of course I can work around this by doing something like

  b = a.n(1000).n(1000)

but, although it works for my code, it is somewhat of a
cludge. Hence I reported the two issues: the topic of this thread
and the issue I found with the n() function:

http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support/browse_thread/thread/b36c90f1490eac19

I hope this makes sense.

Best regards,

Håkan Granath

-- 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org

Reply via email to