#11239: Incorrect coercion of polynomials over finite fields
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  johanbosman        |        Owner:  robertwb
           Type:  defect             |       Status:  needs_info
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.1
      Component:  coercion           |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  finite fields,     |    Merged in:
  polynomials, coercion, sd53        |    Reviewers:  Jean-Pierre Flori
        Authors:  Peter Bruin        |  Work issues:
Report Upstream:  N/A                |       Commit:
         Branch:                     |  236effb6198c6192dce0cedc0e53423c68743e3e
  u/jpflori/ticket/11239             |     Stopgaps:
   Dependencies:  #8335              |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by SimonKing):

 Replying to [comment:26 pbruin]:
 > Replying to [comment:25 SimonKing]:
 > > See my answer on sage-devel. In a nutshell: I would recommend against
 doing expensive tests when talking about conversion, and I would be rather
 permissive in conversions.
 > >
 > > Conversions have no defined properties, and thus there is nothing that
 one could test.
 >
 > Given that a conversion needs to coincide with the coercion if the
 latter exists, one must check for a coercion before applying the "stupid"
 conversion (assuming the "stupid" conversion is desired at all).

 No!! It is just the other way around! Ideally, you have a fast cheap
 stupid conversion, and then a potentially expensive tests tells you
 whether this conversion qualifies as a coercion. This, by the way, is
 exactly what happens when `R._coerce_map_from_(S)` returns True: The
 return value asserts that the conversion qualifies as a coercion.

 > That is actually what I was trying to say on sage-devel in the context
 of polynomial ring quotients, but I wasn't very clear.  I agree that the
 existence of coercion doesn't have to be transitive, or to satisfy any
 rules;

 You mean, conversion, not coercion? Coercion must be transitive. That's
 one of the axioms.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/11239#comment:27>
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to