Hi All, thanks for all the answers, especially for John Cremona for being the only one recognizing what I actually wanted to point out :-) It's probably my fault, I'll take away obscuring examples the next time and try to focus on the issue
For better understanding why I did "CC(-5).n(prec=100)" instead of the better "ComplexField(100)(-5)": Originally I just wanted the log of -5, but ln(-5) gives a "value error" and ln(-5.) returns NaN, so I wrote ln(CC(-5)) which works and returns a complex number, then I wanted to increase the precision of the result, and as -5 can be represented precisely in binary system I just wrote CC (-5).n(prec=100) which is the same as ComplexField(100)(-5) except that the number types are different: sage: a = CC(-5).n(prec=100) sage: b = ComplexField(100)(-5) sage: a == b True sage: type(a) == type(b) False sage: ln(a) NaN sage: ln(b) 1.6094379124341003746007593332 + 3.1415926535897932384626433833*I Georg --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
