#16043: Hilbert Symbol introduces bugs from Pari
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: annahaensch | Owner:
Type: defect | Status:
Priority: major | needs_work
Component: number fields | Milestone: sage-6.2
Keywords: | Resolution:
Authors: Anna Haensch | Merged in:
Report Upstream: Fixed upstream, but not in a | Reviewers: Peter
stable release. | Bruin
Branch: | Work issues: add
Dependencies: #15767 | doctest
| Commit:
| Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by annahaensch):
I see. That makes a lot of sense. I wasn't sure if Sage only updated
PARI at major releases or along the way. In that case, maybe there is not
such a great urgency to patch a fix into sage since we should see it
reflected soon enough.
Then just to be clear, should I change the current doctest to reflect the
mathematically correct answer, i.e.,
{{{
sage: K.<a>=NumberField(x^2+5)
sage: p=K.primes_above(2)[0];p
Fractional ideal (2, a + 1)
sage: K.hilbert_symbol(2*a,-1,p)
1
sage: K.hilbert_symbol(2*a,2,p)
-1
sage: K.hilbert_symbol(2*a,-2,p)
-1
}}}
So that doctests return errors only until the bug is fixed? And after
that point it will just be another nice correct example? Thanks for the
helpful comments!
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16043#comment:7>
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/d/optout.
