#16222: Faster exactification using numeric minpoly
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: gagern | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_info
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: number fields | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Martin von Gagern | Reviewers: Vincent Delecroix
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/vdelecroix/16222 | 8773468739544ed9f12b836c7f28a06be37ffd94
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by gagern):
Replying to [comment:23 vdelecroix]:
> Are there any link/dependency with #14239 or/and #17516?
No, since in general they are not what I'd consider fast. To obtain an
exact symbolic number using #14239, we need to have a minimal polynomial,
while this one here is aiming to obtain that polynomial more quickly.
#17516 would extend #14239 to give results in a larger number of cases,
but won't affect this here either. If at all, there is some overlap with
#17886, since if that works out relly well, it might make this one here
superfluous. I don't think so, though, and since we are only offering this
here as an alternative for now, we can use #18122 to evaluate those
alternatives once we get there.
> … did you know that the symbolic ring is '''very''' broken …
No, I did not, but I share your deep concerns. Have you filed a ticket for
this yet?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16222#comment:24>
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.
