Hi all. The following (minor) issue has been bothering me a little bit
for a while.
Currently if I write lcm([1,2,3]), I get six, but lcm( (1,2,3) ) gives
an error. (And similarly for gcd.) This is because the lcm and gcd
functions (these are in rings/arith.py) contain code like the following:
if
> Yeah. Precision there bears more thinking on. I was actually even
> considering
> having precisions and valuations normalized so that valuation(p) = 1,
> and then only
> integral precisions would be allowed. I'm not sure whether I like
> this idea though...
I'm sure I do not like that idea.
> My mistake, but the errors let me think it was sage's fault. I typed
> pAdicRing(3,prec="lazy")
> which gets accepted. Doing anything with the ring afterwards leads to
> the
> above error. You should probably validate all construction parameters
> at construction time.
Sounds like a good idea.
I have tried your examples and I get expected resuts back (i.e., not
the ones you are listing here)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more opti
In magma, I do this:
> F := FiniteField(2);
> F;
Finite field of size 2
> FiniteField(2);
Finite field of size 2
>
I can't reproduce this with the interface in sage:
sage: F = magma('FiniteField(2);')
sage: magma(F.name())
_sage_[17] := _sage_[12];
sage: magma('%s;'%F.name())
sage: magma.eval(
> > - Currently trying to create an element in a "lazy" ring leads to a
> > Exception (click to the left for traceback):
> > File "integer.pyx", line 669, in integer.Integer.__pow__
> > TypeError: exponent (=lazy) must be an integer
> > Coerce your numbers to real or complex numbers first.
> > (t
On 3/7/07, Karl Crisman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Prof. Stein,
> This is the "completely optional" email to let you know of a SAGE download
> and use. I have been using SAGE (2.2?) for about two months on a Mac OSX.4
> Powerbook G4. The only major problem I have to report is that the n
