On Wednesday, July 11, 2018 at 10:35:28 AM UTC+9, Nils Bruin wrote:
> Note that most parts of the function field infrastructure doesn't make use > of the fact that residue fields as finite (if you do it right, basically > only the part that computes divisor class groups), so with a bit of care > the same code should work in characteristic 0 for most computations. > I agree. > It would be great if you could include that case in your code as well. > That would not happen. See below. > I think this is also how the function field code in magma was developed > (start with global function fields, retool the code to also work for > characteristic 0 (or non-finite positive characteristic base field) where > it makes sense). > So we should follow the same path: focus on global function fields first, and then extend to over other fields. The ticket #22982 is only for global function fields. This already seems to take a long time to be merged to Sage. I do not have a reviewer for its subticket #25435 yet. Perhaps the subticket should be further split to subsubtickets, as no one seems to want to review the lengthy code. After this ticket, I expect someone else (perhaps not me) would come up to extend my code to function fields to over other fields. Some algorithms that I implemented assume essentially finite base field. A prominent one is the Leonard-Pellikaan-Singh-Swanson algorithm computing the maximal order. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-support. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
