#6642: [with patch, needs work] problem with solve (from the tutorial)
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Reporter: jhpalmieri | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.1.3
Component: symbolics | Keywords:
Reviewer: | Author:
Merged: |
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Comment(by kcrisman):
Well, here I need to know from someone what the intended behavior of
_symbolic_ is for algebraic number field elements. Do they want an
approximation or not? Because right now it's not clear that the TypeError
of unable to solve by radicals is ever going to show up, yet that would
seem to be the appropriate response to this.
If an approximation is still desired, it's easy to pass to_poly_solve=True
in at line 1464 of number_field_element.pyx, but if not, then the doctest
can just be changed, so either way the solution is easy. I don't feel
authorized to make changes like that in code I don't use on a daily basis,
though; perhaps the numerical approximation is actually quite useful,
though I have to say to me it sort of undermines the spirit of the rest of
the method, where CC is used to get numerical approximations of radical
solutions.
(This is a place where Jason's idea of "needs info" would be really
helpful.)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6642#comment:8>
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 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
