#4249: [with patch, not ready for review] Inconsistency in number field integral
bases
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: cremona | Owner: was
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-3.2
Component: number theory | Resolution:
Keywords: number fields |
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Comment (by jvoight):
Huh. Applying the patch on sage.math (on 3.1.3) gives:
{{{
sage: F.<t> = NumberField(x^2-5)
sage: enumerate_totallyreal_fields_rel?
sage: ls = enumerate_totallyreal_fields_rel(F, 2, 10^4)
sage: enumerate_totallyreal_fields_rel?
sage: [ f[0] for f in ls ]
[725, 1125, 1600, 2000, 2225, 2525, 3600, 4225, 4400, 4525,
5125, 5225, 5725, 6125, 7225, 7600, 7625, 8000, 8525, 8725,
9225]
}}}
Not really sure what could be causing this, unless it's an ugly platform-
dependent precision issue or something.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/4249#comment:8>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage - Open Source Mathematical Software: Building the Car Instead of
Reinventing the Wheel
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
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-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
