#6018: Confusing behaviour with Dirichlet characters
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: davidloeffler | Owner: craigcitro
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: modular forms | Resolution:
Keywords: Dirichlet | Merged in:
characters | Reviewers:
Authors: David Loeffler, | Work issues:
Peter Bruin | Commit:
Report Upstream: N/A | d0bb0e4bc7c13e5b6b8a4c6d188b65b6d501eb2c
Branch: | Stopgaps:
u/pbruin/6018-DirichletGroup_zeta |
Dependencies: #18540 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by jdemeyer):
Replying to [comment:18 pbruin]:
> Besides solving the problems in the ticket description, this ticket
greatly speeds up constructing Dirichlet groups over number fields.
I assume that this is the main motivation for making `zeta` optional,
right? I am not really convinced though that this extra complexity is
needed...
It is true that `zeta()` for number fields is slow, but that can easily be
improved (#18917).
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/6018#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.
