Indeed it was on 9.4. Sorry I forgot to mention that. Thank you.
On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 9:31:06 PM UTC+1 jus...@mac.com wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2022, at 12:23 , David Roe wrote:
> >
> > This should have been fixed in https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32602.
>
> It was reported fixed f
> On Feb 18, 2022, at 12:23 , David Roe wrote:
>
> This should have been fixed in https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32602.
It was reported fixed for 9.5, and Volker’s release message for 9.5.beta6
indicates it was included then. And it does not fail for sage 9.5 on my system.
Simon may let
This should have been fixed in https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/32602.
David
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 2:58 PM 'Justin C. Walker' via sage-devel <
sage-devel@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2022, at 08:09 , Simon Brandhorst wrote:
> >
> > ```
> > sage: any([magma(True),magma(True)])
>
> On Feb 18, 2022, at 08:09 , Simon Brandhorst wrote:
>
> ```
> sage: any([magma(True),magma(True)])
>
>
> Fatal Python error: _Py_Ch
```
sage: any([magma(True),magma(True)])
Fatal Python error: _Py_CheckRecursiveCall: Cannot recover from stack
overflow.
Python runtime s
