#8800: Doctest coverage of categories - numerous coercion fixes
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: Simon King
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.6.1
Component: categories | Keywords: categories doctests
Author: Simon King | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment(by SimonKing):
Hi John!
Is that 32 or 64 bit? Because:
Replying to [comment:45 cremona]:
> sage -t "sage/groups/perm_gps/permgroup.py"
> **********************************************************************
> File "/home/john/sage-4.6.1.alpha2/devel/sage-
main/sage/groups/perm_gps/permgroup.py", line 1114:
> sage: G.random_element()
> Expected:
> (2,3)(4,5)
> Got:
> (1,2)(4,5)
I changed the expected element. (1,2)(4,5) was originally expected, but I
obtain (2,3)(4,5) on my machine (after applying the patch).
> File "/home/john/sage-4.6.1.alpha2/devel/sage-
main/sage/rings/number_field/number_field.py", line 2960:
> sage: K.selmer_group([K.ideal(2, -a+1), K.ideal(3, a+1),
K.ideal(a)], 3)
> Expected:
> [2, a + 1, a]
> Got:
> [2, a + 1, -a]
This one I also changed. [2, a + 1, -a] was originally expected with
64-bit. But after applying the patch, I got [2, a + 1, a], which was
originally expected with 32-bit.
Strange. What can one do to get a reproducible result?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8800#comment:46>
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.
