#8820: elliptic_exponential broken for curves over number fields
----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------
Reporter: robertwb | Owner: cremona
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.6
Component: elliptic curves | Keywords:
Author: John Cremona | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: Chris Wuthrich, Jeroen Demeyer | Merged:
Work_issues: |
----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------
Comment(by cremona):
Replying to [comment:30 jdemeyer]:
> Replying to [comment:28 cremona]:
> > I took account where sensible of Chris's remark that it is better in
approximate doctests not to have numbers which are approximately zero
>
> Well, my '''personal opinion''' on this differs a bit. I think we
should remember that doctests not only serve as tests, but also as
documentation. I think it is always a difficult excercise to balance
these two. For me personally, the balance always goes in favour of
documentation. When needed, one can still add true tests in a {{{TESTS}}}
section of a doctest.
Fair enough. In the heegner file, which I did not write any of, I did not
want to re-think documentation/tests from scratch, although that might be
a good idea; I just wanted to get things to work! (And I would not have
had to do anything, I think, if I had not followed the suggestion to
eliminate the specific QQ code from elliptic_exponential.)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8820#comment:31>
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.
