#14084: Wrong domain of the fraction field construction functor
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: roed
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.7
Component: padics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------
Comment (by SimonKing):
It is becoming odder and odder.
{{{
sage: P = Zp(15, check=False)
sage: P.__class__.mro()
[sage.rings.padics.padic_base_leaves.pAdicRingCappedRelative_with_category,
sage.rings.padics.padic_base_leaves.pAdicRingCappedRelative,
sage.rings.padics.generic_nodes.pAdicRingBaseGeneric,
sage.rings.padics.padic_base_generic.pAdicBaseGeneric,
sage.rings.padics.generic_nodes.pAdicCappedRelativeRingGeneric,
sage.rings.padics.generic_nodes.pAdicRingGeneric,
sage.rings.padics.padic_generic.pAdicGeneric,
sage.rings.ring.EuclideanDomain,
sage.rings.ring.PrincipalIdealDomain,
sage.rings.ring.IntegralDomain,
sage: P.is_integral_domain()
True
}}}
So, if one creates a p-adic ring where p is not prime, then it still
inherits from `EuclideanDomain`, and is convinced that it is an integral
domain. That makes me wonder whether we could actually ''always''
initialise a p-adic ring in the category of Euclidean domains, regardless
whether check=True or check=False is used.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/14084#comment:11>
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 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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
