#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 pbruin):
Replying to [comment:27 SimonKing]:
> > 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!
I think I see what you mean, but am still not sure. Are you suggesting
that also the existing
{{{
#!python
elif self.base_ring().has_coerce_map_from(P):
return C(self, [x], check=True, is_gen=False,
construct=construct)
}}}
in `PolynomialRing._element_constructor_()` should go away and that there
should be custom coercion maps to replace this check and the similar one
added by my patch?
> You mean, conversion, not coercion? Coercion must be transitive. That's
one of the axioms.
Yes, I meant conversion.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/11239#comment:28>
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.
