I imagine the preparser could be made more robust with
sage: preparse("32")
'sage.rings.integer.Integer(32)'
On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 at 02:08, Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> Perhaps superfluously: the reason why redefining `Integer` (in your example
> through "from sympy import *") can break a command in sa
Perhaps superfluously: the reason why redefining `Integer` (in your example
through "from sympy import *") can break a command in sage that does not
seem to involve `Integer`:
sage: preparse("K = CyclotomicField(32)")
'K = CyclotomicField(Integer(32))'
Due to Sage's preparser, any use of intege
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 12:02 PM Jan Groenewald
wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I am not sure that is a bug...
>
> sage: K = CyclotomicField(32)
> sage: type(Integer)
>
> sage: from sympy import *
> sage: type(Integer)
>
> sage: K = CyclotomicField(int(32))
I don't think it's a bug - "Integer" is not a reser
Hi
I am not sure that is a bug...
sage: K = CyclotomicField(32)
sage: type(Integer)
sage: from sympy import *
sage: type(Integer)
sage: K = CyclotomicField(int(32))
sage:
Regards,
Jan
On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 at 10:33, Александр Каренин (alexKar) <
tremeloesa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As reported i
As reported
in https://ask.sagemath.org/question/72642/does-sympy-break-cyclotomicfield/
, importing sympy as
from sympy import *
and then trying to construct a CyclotomicField as
K = CyclotomicField(32)
results in an error:
TypeError: unable to coerce to an
integer
This seems to be
