Hi Michael!
On Feb 25, 12:17 pm, Michael Brickenstein <brickenst...@mfo.de> wrote:
> In my slimgb test files, usually I do the following:
> - normalize the leading coefficient to 1
> - consider only the leading terms
> - sort the list
> If the algorithm gives back not necessarily a reduced GB, but a
> minimal GB, we have a canonical output.
Sure, but I think the point that Martin wanted to make was: Testing
mathematical correctness of a result is one purpose, but not the
*only* purpose of a doc string example. According to Martin, the doc
test in question should "reflect the natural behaviour of groebner
()." So, if the natural behaviour changes, the doc test is subject to
change.
I am a curious about the new (changed?) groebner() strategy (if it is
not a Singular secret): Will a Hilbert driven computation be more
frequently used (as in the doc test example)? In what cases?
Best regards,
Simon
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
