#16964: MPolynomialIdeal_singular_repr.variety: sage.libs.pari.gen.PariError: 
not
enough precomputed primes
----------------------------------------------+------------------------
       Reporter:  gagern                      |        Owner:
           Type:  defect                      |       Status:  new
       Priority:  major                       |    Milestone:  sage-6.4
      Component:  algebraic geometry          |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  variety qqbar cmp singular  |    Merged in:
        Authors:                              |    Reviewers:
Report Upstream:  N/A                         |  Work issues:
         Branch:                              |       Commit:
   Dependencies:                              |     Stopgaps:
----------------------------------------------+------------------------

Comment (by gagern):

 Here is a reproducing example which at least demonstrates that comparisons
 take ''way'' longer than they should:

 {{{
 sage: r = QQ[x](69721504*x^8 + 251777664*x^6 + 329532012*x^4 +
 184429548*x^2 + 37344321).roots(QQbar, False)
 sage: r
 [-0.0221204634374360? - 1.090991904211621?*I,
  -0.0221204634374360? + 1.090991904211621?*I,
  -0.8088604911480535?*I,
  -0.7598602580415435?*I,
  0.7598602580415435?*I,
  0.8088604911480535?*I,
  0.0221204634374360? - 1.090991904211621?*I,
  0.0221204634374360? + 1.090991904211621?*I]
 sage: [r[0], r[1]].sort()
 }}}

 This is because the comparison of the real parts takes like forever. Which
 in turn is because the computation of its minimal polynomial takes
 forever.

 Looking at the set of all zeros, I can see that there are 4 clearly
 distinct real parts, and each comes with a pair of conjugate solutions
 since the polynomial has real coefficients. This is enough to conclude
 that if the intervals for two real parts overlap, then they must be equal
 and I don't have to do an exact computation for this. Should we try to
 implement some of this reasoning as a special case for
 `AlgebraicNumber.__cmp__`, for the case where the descriptor is exact and
 the minpoly is the same?

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16964#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.

Reply via email to