Excellent. It should be cross-referenced from the docstring to complex_embeddings(), real_embeddings() and also possibly embeddings().
I also notice that places() gives maps to RIF, CIF while {real,complex}_embeddings give maps to RealField, ComplexField. I don't have a feel for which is better since I have never used RIF and CIF, but it might be better to be consistent. John 2008/9/6 Craig Citro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> * K.complex_embeddings() gives all the embeddings of K into CC (the >> complex numbers). >> You would need to eliminate one of ecah conjugate pair of embeddings. >> >> TODO: implement a flag to complex_embeddings() which only gives one of >> each pair. >> > > Actually, this code already exists: > > sage: x = polygen(QQ); K.<a> = NumberField(x^3-2) > sage: K.places() > [Ring morphism: > From: Number Field in a with defining polynomial x^3 - 2 > To: Real Field with 106 bits of precision > Defn: a |--> 1.259921049894873164767210607278, > Ring morphism: > From: Number Field in a with defining polynomial x^3 - 2 > To: Complex Field with 53 bits of precision > Defn: a |--> -0.629960524947437 + 1.09112363597172*I] > > sage: K.places(prec=53) > [Ring morphism: > From: Number Field in a with defining polynomial x^3 - 2 > To: Real Double Field > Defn: a |--> 1.25992104989, > Ring morphism: > From: Number Field in a with defining polynomial x^3 - 2 > To: Complex Double Field > Defn: a |--> -0.629960524947 + 1.09112363597*I] > > It doesn't do anything remarkably clever, and makes the choice to > always take the embedding with positive imaginary part. One could > easily add a flag to make this more customizable ... > > -cc > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@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-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---