https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/24027
In order to do good testing. Do we have a nice list of PIDs? On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 9:07:00 AM UTC+2, Simon Brandhorst wrote: > > Yep, adding doc tests over other rings is the minimum requirement. I can > do that. > Yet I would print a warning message for some time. I would expect some > bugs to be leftover in any case. > -- Simon > > On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 8:35:14 PM UTC+2, William wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I'm really happy to hear people are giving this code some attention! >> >> I wrote the original FGP package. At the time, there was no support for >> computing HNF or anything else except for ZZ, so I couldn't even test or >> try the algorithms there. I **might** have made some assumptions about the >> base ring being ZZ for simplicity due to this, but I hope I didn't. I >> don't remember -- it was a long time ago. >> >> The only reason this hasn't moved forward after more support for HNF was >> added for other PIDs is that I'm busy with other things these days. I >> hope somebody else will take over. If I was working on this code, I >> would go through the module and add a ton of doctests analogous to the >> existing tests over ZZ, but over some other PID's. I definitely, >> definitely would NOT even consider just enabling this functionality with a >> warning message, and crossing my fingers like Simon seems to be suggestion >> below. I strongly object to that. I endorse: >> >> - enable the functionality >> - write a bunch of new doctests showing how (and that) it works. >> - then release it publicly. >> >> If it does work, doing the above is maybe 1 day of work. If it doesn't >> work, so the above is much harder than 1 day of work, then we shouldn't >> have released it in the first place. >> >> Again, Simon, I'm really happy you're looking into this and making this >> more general functionality available. I was pretty happy with my original >> FGP implementation, which was a lot of work one summer years ago... >> >> -- William >> >> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:48 AM Simon Brandhorst <sbran...@web.de> wrote: >> >>> O.K. I will do that. Even if we do not have enough tests. Maybe we can >>> allow it and print some >>> "This code is still experimental" warning. After all it will only get >>> really stable is people use it a lot. >>> >>> On Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 5:06:20 PM UTC+2, Simon Brandhorst >>> wrote: >>> >>>> sage: L.<w> = NumberField(x^2 - x + 2) >>>> sage: OL = L.ring_of_integers() >>>> sage: V = OL**3; W = V.span([[0,w,0], [1,0,1-w]], OL) >>>> sage: FGP_Module(V,W) >>>> This works >>>> >>>> sage: V.quotient(W) >>>> NotImplementedError: quotients of modules over rings other than fields >>>> or ZZ is not fully implemented >>>> >>>> >>>> Well FGP looks pretty implemented to me. >>>> >>>> Objections? >>>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "sage-devel" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- >> -- William Stein >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
