On Jun 17, 1:21 pm, chris wuthrich
wrote:
> > There is a patch athttp://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7545
> > which adds support for Gaussian integers.
>
> ... and which could be easily adapted to work with Eisenstein
> integers, I believe.
>
How did I not know about this ticket??? Than
> There is a patch at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7545
> which adds support for Gaussian integers.
... and which could be easily adapted to work with Eisenstein
integers, I believe.
Note also that pari has Gaussian Integers and I am sure their
implementation is better than mine,
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 6:28 AM, kcrisman wrote:
>> Would it be very difficult to implement a GaussianIntegers class which
>> used the symbolic I instead but otherwise used number fields behind
>> the curtain, or would that lead to too much confusion elsewhere?
>>
The symbolic I uses number field
> A more exotic representation (but more appropriate for more general
> quadratic number fields) is to represent the Gaussian Integers as the
> maximal order in the number field Q(√-1).
>
> sage: QFi. = NumberField(x^2 + 1)
> sage: GI = QFi.order(sr1) # Create the Gaussian Integers
> sage: i1
On Jun 16, 4:38 pm, kjell wrote:
> I have a need to do some computations in the Eisenstein integers
> (modular exponentiations, cubic characters), and I'm wondering what
> the current support (or more to the point, the "right way") for
> handling them is in Sage. I did notice the reference at:
>
