Dear all, At #26925 I failed to make a more direct coercion nf -> RR. What we have now go through nf -> AA -> RLF -> RR and is dramatically slow. The coercion path can be analyzed via
sage: K.<a> = NumberField(x^2 - x - 1, embedding=(1+AA(5).sqrt())/2) sage: cm = get_coercion_model() sage: cm.explain(K, RR) The real field RR declares "_mpfr_" as being a conversion method in its constructor. However, the coercion model does prefer a composite map with 2 intermediates rather than this direct conversion method... 1) Would it be desirable that a direct named conversion such as _mpfr_ would be preferred than a coercion through intermediate? 2) Is there a way to tell Sage that I want this specific coercion to go through the _mpfr_ method? Any input appreciated. Vincent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
