Ok, well in the mean time I will force the field to be QQ on my hand. But I think a long end solution would be to do some test on the root system type to decide what is the best field.
Cheers Viviane 2012/5/8 Christian Stump <christian.st...@gmail.com>: > Hi Viviane, > >> This type of thing just broke my entire patch on multivariate >> polynomials. I had to fix it by changing the field to ZZ or QQ but I >> wonder why the default field has been changed... > > sorry for that! > > the reason is that I implemented non-crystallographic root systems and > reflection groups. That's why I changed the default ring to be the > universal cyclotomics (which is the smallest field containing the > integers and all roots of unity). But I agree that in the > crystallographic types (where everything works over the integers), we > still should have things working over ZZ. > > This patch is still very much under construction, so I expect myself > to make tons of further changes. I will hopefully find some time tod > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-combinat-devel" group. > To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
