#2420: [with patch, needs work] Extending the gap interface to uni- and
multivariate polynomial rings over number fields
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
   Reporter:  SimonKing                   |       Owner:  SimonKing             
                                        
       Type:  enhancement                 |      Status:  needs_work            
                                        
   Priority:  major                       |   Milestone:  sage-4.5              
                                        
  Component:  interfaces                  |    Keywords:  gap interface, 
polynomial rings, number fields, editor_mhansen
     Author:  Simon King                  |    Upstream:  N/A                   
                                        
   Reviewer:                              |      Merged:                        
                                        
Work_issues:  Side effect of GAP on Pari  |  
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Changes (by newvalueoldvalue):

 * cc: mabshoff (removed)
 * cc: wdj, mhansen, davidloeffler (added)
  * upstream:  => N/A
  * work_issues:  => Side effect of GAP on Pari
  * author:  => Simon King


Comment:

 I finally resumed work on this ticket. It now depends on #8909 and #9423.
 Therefore, I added all people who commented on these tickets as Cc here. I
 hope you don't mind.

 The things that I announced above are still working (main difference: due
 to #8909, Sage's cyclotomic fields are now represented as cyclotomic
 fields in GAP).

 However, the doctest trouble persist, so, it still is "needs_work". But I
 was able to narrow the problem down.

 Apparently it is a side effect of GAP on Pari. After two days of work, I
 found that it is triggered by two ''different'' doctests in
 sage/rings/polynomial/polynomial_element.pyx, namely the test for
 {{{_gap_()}}} and for {{{resultant()}}}.

 It boils down to the following:
 {{{
 sage: R.<a, b> = QQ[]
 sage: b._pari_()   # this is fine
 b
 sage: R.<y> = GF(7)[]
 sage: f = y^3 - 17*y + 5
 sage: g = gap(f)   # this uses the new patch
 sage: f.factor()   # this uses pari
 (y + 5) * (y + 1)^2
 sage: R.<a, b> = QQ[]
 sage: b._pari_()   # this is a disaster!
 Mod(3, 7)
 }}}

 Does any of you have an explanation for this?

 Cheers,

 Simon

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/2420#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.

Reply via email to