#8327: Implement the universal cyclotomic field, using Zumbroich basis
-----------------------------------------------------+----------------------
       Reporter:  nthiery                            |         Owner:           
   
           Type:  enhancement                        |        Status:  
needs_review
       Priority:  major                              |     Milestone:  sage-5.6 
   
      Component:  number fields                      |    Resolution:           
   
       Keywords:  Cyclotomic field, Zumbroich basis  |   Work issues:           
   
Report Upstream:  N/A                                |     Reviewers:           
   
        Authors:  Christian Stump, Simon King        |     Merged in:           
   
   Dependencies:  #13727, #13728                     |      Stopgaps:           
   
-----------------------------------------------------+----------------------

Comment (by chapoton):

 A few more comments

 * this import is apparently not used :

 from sage.rings.complex_field import ComplexField

 * the sort of elements is backwards compared to the order for cyclotomic
 fields
 {{{
 sage: v=UCF.random_element(7);v
 -5*E(7) - 4*E(7)^3 + 4*E(7)^4 + E(7)^5
 sage: v.to_cyclotomic_field()
 zeta7^5 + 4*zeta7^4 - 4*zeta7^3 - 5*zeta7
 }}}
 maybe it would be better to go the same way ? but maybe this is the same
 as gap ?

 * Is the is_subring method necessary ? it is almost empty !

 * in the element constructor, maybe one could answer by something like

 "no coercion found for elements of XXX"

 with XXX the parent of the argument ? It would be more informative, no ?

 * maybe zumbroich_basis should be called zumbroich_basis_indices ? I would
 expect that something called zumbroich_basis would return elements of the
 field, which is not really the case. Well, this is not that important..

 * why is the hash function test tagged with random ? does it depend on the
 computer or something like that ?

 * in _invert_, one should rather raise a ZeroDivisionError when trying to
 invert 0 ?

 * more generally, maybe one could try to avoid using assert, and better
 raise precise Exceptions ?

 * I have not read seriously the cython part, but found a typo :

 inverse for the univeral

 That's all for today

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8327#comment:121>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
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.

Reply via email to