First of all, UCF is *not* a tower of relative fields. So the first
remark does not apply.
Secondly, the slowness of UCF compared to the slowness of symbolic (i.e.
SR) is more than acceptable. The slowness refered in the second comment
is when you compare with a fixed (absolute) number field.
On 01/08/16 23:47, saad khalid wrote:
Very cool, thank you! I looked into UCF a bit and on this page:
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/reference/number_fields/sage/rings/number_field/number_field.html
It says "Doing arithmetic in towers of relative fields that depends on
canonical coercions is currently VERY SLOW. It is much better to explicitly
coerce all elements into a common field, then do arithmetic with them there
(which is quite fast).", and on another page, it says "arithmetical
operations are quite expensive, so the use of internally represented
cyclotomics is not recommended for doing arithmetic over number fields,
such as calculations with matrices of cyclotomics."
What exactly does that mean? To me, it reads like it's saying that I
shouldn't be using UCF with algebraic operations, because that is slow
somehow. So, would it be better to use something else? Or am I reading that
incorrectly? Sorry for the confusion
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-support" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-support.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
