#807: construction of function fields
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
       Reporter:  nbruin            |         Owner:  somebody
           Type:  defect            |        Status:  new     
       Priority:  major             |     Milestone:  sage-5.8
      Component:  basic arithmetic  |    Resolution:          
       Keywords:                    |   Work issues:          
Report Upstream:  N/A               |     Reviewers:          
        Authors:                    |     Merged in:          
   Dependencies:                    |      Stopgaps:          
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------

Comment (by nbruin):

 Replying to [comment:9 tscrim]:
 Ah, I wasn't aware of the `FractionField` behaviour.
 In a way, ignoring "names" would be good. Compare:
 {{{
 sage: preparse("R.<x>=QQ[t]")
 'R = QQ[t]; (x,) = R._first_ngens(1)'
 sage: preparse("R.<x>=PolynomialRing(QQ,'t')")
 "R = PolynomialRing(QQ,'t', names=('x',)); (x,) = R._first_ngens(1)"
 sage: preparse("R.<x>=PolynomialRing(QQ,names='t')")
 "R = PolynomialRing(QQ,names='t', names=('x',)); (x,) = R._first_ngens(1)"
 }}}
 In the first and second cases, it is recognised that a print name supplied
 by the LHS is superfluous, so it gets ignored (meaning: not inserted into
 the RHS). In the third case, the preparser fails to recognize this (the
 preparser will always have problems like that).

 Given that print names are always superfluous for FractionField, ignoring
 the names field would be the right thing. However, I think
 `fraction_field` is not the proper place to do this and it would not solve
 the issue of this ticket: In
 {{{
 P1.<t>=FractionField(QQ[])
 }}}
 or
 {{{
 P1.<t>=QQ[].fraction_field()
 }}}
 it's not just that a `names=('t',)` should not be injected into the
 `fraction_field` call, it should be injected into the polynomial ring
 constructor. Of course, for this case the solution is
 {{{
 sage: P1.<t>=FunctionField(QQ)
 }}}

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/807#comment:12>
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.


Reply via email to