Thanks Nils. Actually, I think that what I need is a conversion rather than
a coercion as `register_as_conversion()` lets me change the category.
On Wednesday 31 July 2024 at 2:49:16 am UTC+10 Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Monday 29 July 2024 at 22:13:27 UTC-7 Andrew wrote:
>
> [Not sure if this belong
On Monday 29 July 2024 at 22:13:27 UTC-7 Andrew wrote:
[Not sure if this belongs here or in sage-dev...]
I am trying to implement coercions between algebras that are related by
base change. For example,consider
A=CombinatorialFreeModule(ZZ['x'], ['1','2'])
B=CombinatorialFreeModule(ZZ, ['1','2'
Ah, thanks!
On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 4:12:34 PM UTC-4 trevor...@gmail.com wrote:
> There is a description/proposed fix of the problem on this trac ticket:
> https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/34292
>
> On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-7 keirh...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>
>> This
There is a description/proposed fix of the problem on this trac
ticket: https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/34292
On Thursday, August 11, 2022 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-7 keirh...@gmail.com wrote:
> This code:
>
>
>
>
> *H = PermutationGroup([ [(1,2), (3,4)], [(5,6,7),(12,14,18)] ])kH =
> H.algebra(GF(2)
This code:
*H = PermutationGroup([ [(1,2), (3,4)], [(5,6,7),(12,14,18)] ])kH =
H.algebra(GF(2))[a, b] = H.gens()# Produces no coercion errorprint((kH(a) +
kH(b) + H.one())^2)# Produces a coercion error in all cases belowtry:
print((kH(a) + kH(b) + kH(kH.one()))^2)ex
Is the x you give in these examples the same x as above? I’m worried (maybe
needlessly) about if the x you give includes a summand of kH.one(). If the
x you give does not include a summand of one, then the behavior you
described is consistent with what I think the problem is. If the x in the
new ex
Thanks for this workaround. I was passing the group algebra to a function
and then accessing the base group like so:
kH.group()
Both of the following cause the coercion error:
kH.one() * x
kH.group().one() * x
But this works fine:
H.one()*x
I will just have to pass the original group along a
I can reproduce this on 9.7.beta7.
The problem is that the parent is not understood to be the same (even
though it clearly is). A workaround is:
sage: x = kH(a) + kH(b) + kH(H.one()); x
() + (5,6,7)(12,14,18) + (1,2)(3,4)
sage: x*x
(5,7,6)(12,18,14)
Here H.one() puts the one in the right pa
The Sage version I was using is 9.6.
On Friday, August 5, 2022 at 7:19:48 PM UTC-4 keirh...@gmail.com wrote:
> When I do this:
>
>
>
>
>
> *H = PermutationGroup([ [(1,2), (3,4)], [(5,6,7),(12,14,18)] ])kH =
> H.algebra(GF(2))[a, b] = H.gens()x = kH(a) + kH(b) + kH.one(); print(x)x*x*
>
> I get a
ZZ and RDF have string representations as '123' and '123.456',
respectively. The analog for QQ is
sage: QQ('123/456')
41/152
On Sunday, May 1, 2016 at 4:14:42 AM UTC+2, kcrisman wrote:
>
> RDF('0.0') is fine
> QQ(RDF('0.0')) is fine
> QQ('0') is fine
>
That one is really just QQ(ZZ('0')) using
It's not that I get an error message, the problem is that the parent of g
should be a multivariate polynomial ring rather than a sympy.core.add.Add
class object. After copying my Python code into the worksheet rather than
loading the file it works as expected, so I assume that changes the
inter
I have no problems running your code with nfs(137,1000,2,36). Please post
your full error message.
--
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+
It appears that I was wrong about what was causing the problem as I still
get the error. I've moved to using the cloud version as I had thought that
there is a problem with my installation. Ideally I want to take a given
integer and construct a polynomial from its base m expansion for some n.
T
Thanks for the pointer towards the relevance of my observation. I was using
Python code to generate the polynomial in the case when it didn't work, and
copying the same code into the Sage worksheet avoids the error. I'm still a
little unsure as to why the parent of the f was the univariate polyn
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 6:45:03 AM UTC-7, Tristan wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if it's relevant but my polynomial f is defined by taking a
> list of coefficients and then adding relevant powers of u multiplied by
> each coefficient to an initial 0 polynomial. I mention this because if I
> define th
On May 3, 7:23 pm, Nils Bruin wrote:
> See a.log_to_int? for help.
... which says "Use int(self) to directly get a Python int."
so it looks like you have found a bug in the documentation! You help
the project if you would file a report and you would really help if
you'd also include the fix (dele
On May 3, 3:28 pm, eggartmumie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as a newbie I am rather irritated about coercion working in 4.5.2 and
> not working in 4.6.
> In 4.5.2 the following works nicely and up to expectation
>
> F.=GF(2^4);
> for i in range(15):
> a = x^i; print a,'with integer representation', int(a)
i'm afraid i don't know how tickets work. Incidentally, i'll be
attending sage-days in marseille next month, is this an occasion to
learn about tickets and all that ?
as for the bug, i've been using x.complex_embedding() instead, which
doesn't crash. How reliable can its output be, though ?
On 14
hi, i've just compiled a sage 4.3 from scratch (rather than update),
and the problem is still there...
thoughts anyone ?
thanks!
On 14 jan, 13:37, Pierre wrote:
> hello,
>
> this must be the slowest reply in the history of sage. More than a
> month later, i have upgraded and am now running sage
hello,
this must be the slowest reply in the history of sage. More than a
month later, i have upgraded and am now running sage 4.3. When i enter
your lines :
> sage: k. = CyclotomicField(4)
> sage: R. = k[]
> sage: p=3; K. = NumberField(x^2-p)
> sage: i = K(k.gen())
> sage: CDF(i)
... i get a ve
thank you.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Kwankyu wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On Jun 9, 7:22 pm, Ajay Rawat wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I want to uninstall sage 3.2.3 from my ubuntu 8.04 LTS.
> > so that i can install sage 4.0.
> > what i have to do.
> > Thanking you
>
> Are you asking me? Just delete the Sa
Hi,
On Jun 9, 7:22 pm, Ajay Rawat wrote:
> Hi,
> I want to uninstall sage 3.2.3 from my ubuntu 8.04 LTS.
> so that i can install sage 4.0.
> what i have to do.
> Thanking you
Are you asking me? Just delete the Sage root directory wherever it is
(usually /usr/local/sage). Then install the newe
Hi,
I want to uninstall sage 3.2.3 from my ubuntu 8.04 LTS.
so that i can install sage 4.0.
what i have to do.
Thanking you
--
Ajay Rawat
Kalpakkam, IGCAR
-
Save Himalayas
Hi Robert,
Thank you for the explanation.
Kwankyu
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 a
On Jun 8, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Kwankyu wrote:
> I tried change_ring(), without success...
>
> sage: R.=PowerSeriesRing(QQ)
> sage: P.=PolynomialRing(R)
> sage: f=t*x+t^2
> sage: g=f/t
> sage: f
> t*x + t^2
> sage: g
> x + t
> sage: f.parent()
> Univariate Polynomial Ring in x over Power Series Rin
I tried change_ring(), without success...
sage: R.=PowerSeriesRing(QQ)
sage: P.=PolynomialRing(R)
sage: f=t*x+t^2
sage: g=f/t
sage: f
t*x + t^2
sage: g
x + t
sage: f.parent()
Univariate Polynomial Ring in x over Power Series Ring in t over
Rational Field
sage: g.parent()
Univariate Polynomial Rin
A comparable case works well.
sage: S.=ZZ[]
sage: f=2*x+4;
sage: f/2
x + 2
sage: S(f/2).parent()
Univariate Polynomial Ring in x over Integer Ring
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this gr
Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Jason Bandlow wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is the following missing coercion known? I couldn't find anything on
>> trac, but there's a lot there related to coercion, so I may have
>> missed it.
>>
>> sage: a = float(1.0)
>> sage: QQ(
On Mar 21, 2009, at 9:06 AM, Jason Bandlow wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Is the following missing coercion known? I couldn't find anything on
> trac, but there's a lot there related to coercion, so I may have
> missed it.
>
> sage: a = float(1.0)
> sage: QQ(a)
> TypeError: Unable to
Sweet!
Alex
On Mar 12, 5:07 pm, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Alex Raichev wrote:
>
> >> What would you want to do with QQbar in the Symbolic Ring?
>
> > Everything: differentiate functions with coefficients in QQbar,
> > integrate them, etc.
> > I too don't know a
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Alex Raichev wrote:
>
>> What would you want to do with QQbar in the Symbolic Ring?
>
> Everything: differentiate functions with coefficients in QQbar,
> integrate them, etc.
> I too don't know anything about Maxima or the new symbolics
> package in preparation
> What would you want to do with QQbar in the Symbolic Ring?
Everything: differentiate functions with coefficients in QQbar,
integrate them, etc.
I too don't know anything about Maxima or the new symbolics
package in preparation --Pynac is it? So, i'm just standing on the
sidelines cheering
On Mar 11, 2009, at 3:50 PM, Carl Witty wrote:
>
> On Mar 11, 2:55 pm, Alex Raichev wrote:
Well, I think I can explain what's happening. There's a
coercion from
arbitrary polynomials into the Symbolic Ring; this is useful,
because
it lets you deal with polynomials o
On Mar 11, 2:55 pm, Alex Raichev wrote:
> > > Well, I think I can explain what's happening. There's a coercion from
> > > arbitrary polynomials into the Symbolic Ring; this is useful, because
> > > it lets you deal with polynomials over the rationals, etc.
>
> Similarly, i think a coercion from
> > Well, I think I can explain what's happening. There's a coercion from
> > arbitrary polynomials into the Symbolic Ring; this is useful, because
> > it lets you deal with polynomials over the rationals, etc.
Similarly, i think a coercion from QQbar and polynomials over QQbar to
the Symbolic R
On Mar 10, 2009, at 8:57 PM, Carl Witty wrote:
> On Mar 10, 6:47 pm, Alex Raichev wrote:
>> Does anyone know what's up with this weird error? Sage can
>> multiply a
>> symbolic variable and a constant of a polynomial ring R but not a
>> symbolic variable and an element of R.base_ring().
>>
>>
On Mar 10, 6:47 pm, Alex Raichev wrote:
> Does anyone know what's up with this weird error? Sage can multiply a
> symbolic variable and a constant of a polynomial ring R but not a
> symbolic variable and an element of R.base_ring().
>
> Alex
>
> sage: var('t')
> t
> sage: K.= NumberField(t^2+2,'
On Jan 4, 2009, at 11:47 AM, ggrafendorfer wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> thanks for your answer,
> I not sure if I know the difference between coercion and conversion,
> could you explain it to me?
A coercion is implicit and happens, for example, when you do arithmetic.
sage: 1 + 1/2# 1 is coerced
On Jul 5, 8:39 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 5, 2008, at 7:16 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> would be good enough? (That is, assuming I've defined a reasonable
> >>> __eq__ method for the parents, the SteenrodAlgebra class.)
>
> >> Yes, though that will mea
On Jul 5, 2008, at 7:16 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>> would be good enough? (That is, assuming I've defined a reasonable
>>> __eq__ method for the parents, the SteenrodAlgebra class.)
>>
>> Yes, though that will mean something like A5.P(2) - A5.P(2) == 0 will
>> return False. This is why you
On Jul 5, 5:48 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 5, 2008, at 12:42 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Ah, it looks like your __eq__ method is assuming that self and
> other
> are elements of the steenrod algebra. There are two solutions to
> this:
On Jul 5, 2008, at 12:42 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>
Ah, it looks like your __eq__ method is assuming that self and
other
are elements of the steenrod algebra. There are two solutions to
this:
>>
1) Use __cmp__ which (in Sage) will ensure that self and other have
>
On Jul 5, 2008, at 12:50 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
> On Jul 5, 10:08 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Jul 4, 2008, at 1:52 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I still don't understand two things: why the gen method is being
>>> used,
>>> and why if I multiply an element
On Jul 5, 10:08 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2008, at 1:52 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> On Jul 4, 2008, at 10:44 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> > So I'm very confused. Any ideas
On Jul 5, 10:08 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2008, at 1:52 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> On Jul 4, 2008, at 10:44 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> > So I'm very confused. Any ideas
On Jul 4, 2008, at 1:52 PM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> On Jul 4, 2008, at 10:44 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> So I'm very confused. Any ideas what I should look at to try
> to fix
> this?
>>
On Jul 4, 10:53 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2008, at 10:44 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> So I'm very confused. Any ideas what I should look at to try to fix
> >>> this?
>
> >> Yes, Sage caches some information so it doesn't have to do the logic
> >> a
On Jul 4, 2008, at 10:44 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>>
>>> So I'm very confused. Any ideas what I should look at to try to fix
>>> this?
>>
>> Yes, Sage caches some information so it doesn't have to do the logic
>> anew on each arithmetic operation. One thing to check is if A5 == A7
>> succeeds.
On Jul 4, 10:25 am, Robert Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2008, at 7:12 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
>
> > I'm running into a coercion problem. I'm trying to define a class
> > SteenrodAlgebra (based on the Algebra class); there should be one
> > Steenrod algebra for each prime n
On Jul 4, 2008, at 7:12 AM, John H Palmieri wrote:
> I'm running into a coercion problem. I'm trying to define a class
> SteenrodAlgebra (based on the Algebra class); there should be one
> Steenrod algebra for each prime number p, and it is an algebra over
> GF(p). For example, you can do
>
> s
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 7:18 PM, Robert Bradshaw
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 2, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> This is definitely not a problem with coercion -- it's a problem with
>> the iterator for G.
>
> Coercion...always the scapegoat :-)
>
I made several opt
On Jun 2, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is definitely not a problem with coercion -- it's a problem with
> the iterator for G.
Coercion...always the scapegoat :-)
- Robert
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-
On Jun 3, 3:49 am, "David Joyner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
> Thanks. I reported this ashttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3353
prun indicates that we are calling GAP in z.next() somewhere, so due
to pexpect overhead this also should suck. "prun z.next()" took *35*
CPU seconds on s
Thanks. I reported this as http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3353
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 9:43 PM, Mike Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> This is definitely not a problem with coercion -- it's a problem with
> the iterator for G. For example. try this:
>
> sage: z = iter(G
Hello,
This is definitely not a problem with coercion -- it's a problem with
the iterator for G. For example. try this:
sage: z = iter(G)
sage: z
sage: z.next()
[0 1]
[1 0]
sage: z.next()
[0 1]
[1 1]
It takes quite a bit of time to do each .next() which makes me suspect
that something silly i
On Monday, August 27, 2007, at 06:37PM, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On 8/27/07, Justin Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi, all,
>>
>> I do this, and get integers, but the types are rational:
>>
>> sage: b1=0
>> sage: b2=2
>> sage: s=(b1+b2)/2
>> sage: n=(b1-b2)/2
>> sage:
On 8/27/07, Justin Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I do this, and get integers, but the types are rational:
>
> sage: b1=0
> sage: b2=2
> sage: s=(b1+b2)/2
> sage: n=(b1-b2)/2
> sage: s
> 1
> sage: n
> -1
That s and n are rational is correct, since "/ is a constructor
for elements
> I imagine what the problem would be however I cannot reproduce it, where did
> you run that test, is it a vanilla SAGE 2.0?
My computation ran on sage-2.0 on sage.math.
To replicate my traceback elsewhere you'll have to install the
database_kohel-20060803 package (sage -i database_kohel-200608
Hi there,
I imagine what the problem would be however I cannot reproduce it, where did
you run that test, is it a vanilla SAGE 2.0?
Martin
This is my trackback:
sage: sage: M = X.T(13).matrix()
Modular polynomial database
file /home/malb/SAGE/data/kohel/PolMod/Cls/pol.013.dbz not available
-
59 matches
Mail list logo
