On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Gary Furnish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -1. First, everything cwitty said is correct. Second, if we start > using ZZ[sqrt(2)] and ZZ[sqrt(3)], then sqrt(2)+sqrt(3) requires going > through the coercion system which was designed to be elegant instead > of fast, so this becomes insanely slow for any serious use. Finally, > this is going to require serious code duplication from symbolics, so > I'm not sure what the big gain is over just using symbolics to do this > in the first place.
Also, cwitty pointed out that sage: sum([sqrt(p) for p in prime_range(1000)]) works fine in Sage now, but with your (and my) proposal, it would be impossible, since it would require constructing a ring of integers of a number field of degree 2^168.. -- 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://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
