On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 15:07:03 -0000, John Voight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks, somehow I knew this was going to become a trac ticket. It is > also my suspicion that it is an optimization issue with number > fields. It seems really bizarre that it should be calling a > polynomial ring constructor!
Why? Elements of number fields are stored as polynomial ring elements. > (The cost right now is absolutely killing me right now. I've started > enumerating relative extensions of number fields, and doing actual > computation right now is taking negligible time in comparison to > actual stuff! I've already spent a couple of hours trying to figure > out exactly where in my code this is happening, but because of the > many ways in which elements are being created--and needing to use pari > in between for some functionality which has not been implemented, e.g. > finding an LLL-reduced basis of the ring of integers--even after my > attempts, I had only managed to slow things down!) Oh no. But it's really not surprising given how little time has been spent optimizing number fields. Keep in mind, e.g., that just over a month ago Sage didn't even have rings of integers. -- William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
