#14990: Implement algebraic closures of finite fields
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  pbruin             |        Owner:
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_work
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.2
      Component:  algebra            |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  finite field       |    Merged in:
  algebraic closure                  |    Reviewers:
        Authors:  Peter Bruin        |  Work issues:
Report Upstream:  N/A                |       Commit:
         Branch:  u/pbruin/14990     |  33f982f1acbf61cf08897e6a46ee23bb14e78e1e
   Dependencies:  #14958, #13214     |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by vdelecroix):

 Hi Peter,

 Either I badly explained something or there is something contradictory in
 your argument. First of all you said

 > The main use for it [the equality] is in deciding whether
 > to allow coercion from one `AlgebraicClosureFiniteField`
 > to another.

 Fine. But that was my point, equality is broken as we currently have with
 your branch applied
 {{{
 sage: p = next_prime(100000)
 sage: K = GF(p)
 sage: F1 = K.algebraic_closure()
 sage: F2 = K.algebraic_closure()
 sage: F1 == F2
 True
 sage: _ = F1.gen(3)   # force computation in PCL 1
 sage: F1 == F2
 False
 sage: _ = F2.gen(3)   # same computation in PCL 2
 sage: F1 == F2
 True
 }}}
 So depending in which stage of the computation you are, there will or will
 not be a coercion between your fields! Do you agree that there is a
 problem here?

 > we do definitely want to check "only" equality, not identity [of PCL].

 Here it depends on what you mean by "equality". If it is equality as
 mathematical object I do agree if it is equality as Python comparison I
 strongly disagree. The Python equality of PCL currently is: "two PCL are
 equal if they agree on their already made computations". And, as Jean-
 Pierre mentioned, it is not the purpose of that ticket to improve that.

 Vincent

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/14990#comment:69>
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.

Reply via email to