#6273: [with patch, needs work (still)] Improve random_element for number field
orders and ideals (easy)
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Reporter: davidloeffler | Owner: was
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.0.2
Component: number theory | Keywords: number field ideal order
Reviewer: Nick Alexander | Author: John Cremona
Merged: |
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Comment(by cremona):
The new patch sorts out the parent problem ok, with suitable new doctests.
I note that you now delegate the random function for orders to that of
ideals -- this means that the new code is *not* used for non-maximal
order, unfortunately. But then the same was true for my version.
So I would have given this a positive review, while noting that at some
point non-maximal orders will need to be dealt with too.
Unfortunately:
{{{
sage -t "devel/sage-6273/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal.py"
**********************************************************************
File
"/home/john/sage-4.0.2.rc0/devel/sage-6273/sage/rings/number_field/number_field_ideal.py",
line 1045:
sage: I.basis()
Expected:
[3, -a + 1, (-3/2*b - 1497/2)*a, (-1/2*b - 499/2)*a - b - 499]
Got:
[3, a + 2, (3/2*b + 1497/2)*a, (b + 499)*a - b - 499]
}}}
so it's still "needs work"
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6273#comment:8>
Sage <http://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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
