On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Oct 3, 2008, at 12:05 PM, William Stein wrote: > >> >>>> I'm worried that won't work, since CC is 53-bit precision floats, so >>>> "by extension SR" means you'll end up with 1.0*I rather than I. >>> >>> I just meant in the sense that fixing an embedding into CC fixes the >>> embedding into SR, QQbar, ComplexField(1000), etc. The embedding will >>> actually be into the "complex lazy field." >> >> Can you write a paragraph or two about these new lazy >> fields you've been implementing? > > Yes, see the docstrings at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/ > 4226 . >
Thanks, that was helpful. I noticed that the docstring for cdef class RealLazyField_class(LazyField) has some tex markup, but is """ instead of r""", which will cause trouble when this gets included in the reference manual... William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
