#16855: Make finite fields satisfy comparison by identity
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: pbruin | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: finite rings | Resolution:
Keywords: finite field | Merged in:
comparison | Reviewers:
Authors: Peter Bruin | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 10bcb8df90756b034907059cf965cbfe01dbc5ac
u/pbruin/16855-FiniteField_comparison| Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by SimonKing):
Replying to [comment:2 pbruin]:
> Changing branch to not introduce coercions between different
implementations of the same finite field, since this will lead to memory
leaks; see Nils Bruin's comments [https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-
devel/c8cCvT84CLo/436vAxVoBdMJ here].
I thought that the kind of memory leaks he mentions has meanwhile been
fixed. IIRC, having non-leaking bidirectional coercion was the motivation
of using weak references to (co?)domain and parent of coercion maps.
So, can you or Nils give an actual example of a leak caused by
bidirectional coercion in the current sage version? Or could you point me
to a relevant leak-fixing ticket that has not been merged yet?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16855#comment:3>
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.
